RSS Feed
May 4th, 2012 
FAKE NEWS for the Zionist agenda 
Climate change scientists are now admitting that their computer generated climate change models are wrong.
According to a study published in the journal Nature, plants are flowering up to 8 times faster than were projected. The authors of the study admit that their previous summations were incorrect and based on erroneous information.
While the researchers have been studying plants and the effect climate change has on them, they simply assumed that the plants would respond “essentially the same way to experimental warming with lamps and open top chambers”. Reality set in and proved that these scientists were wrong.
Elizabeth Wolkovich, lead researcher from the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, along with other scientists, observed warming experiments of 4 continents and 1,634 plant species.
Wolkovich stated:
“What we found is that the experiments don’t line up with the long term data, and in fact they greatly underestimate how much plants change their leafing and flowering with warming. So for models based on experimental data, then we would expect that plants are leafing four times faster and flowering eight times faster in the long term historical record than what we’re using in some of the models.”
The Royal Meteorological Society in the UK created a detailed network of scientific observers who recorded flowering times and dates. They recorded their data reaching back to 1875.
Wolkovich discovered that contrary to their computer model projections, “in terms of long term observations, the records are very coherent and very consistent and they suggest for every degree celsius of warming we get we are going to get a five- to six-day change in how plants leaf and flower.”
The justification for the errors in the study arises from the obvious difference between artificial settings in laboratories as compared with actual environments. However, this basis proves the point that when climate change alarmists assert that man is the sole contributor to climate change, this assertion is based on erroneous data.
Wolkovich would have us believe that the scientists made educated estimations. Their admitted errors simply proves that when scientists set out to prove the effects of climate change, they are not taking reality into account, but rather relying on assumptions and incorrect valuations now how the earth might react.
Considering the impact climate change alarmists have on the social and governmental perspective, it appears flippant when Wolkovich nonchalantly says, “I guess we will never get to perfectly match nature, but I am hopeful as scientists we can do much, much better, given funding resources.”
Wolkovich is concerned about future funding over the fact that her team uncovered that their computer models were wrong. She feels that “we have a very consistent message” in climate change. She also states that “how we fund and invest in and really design experiments” would yield more favorable results. In the name of science, it sounds like this researcher would work harder to prove her agenda.
To the dismay of Dr. This Rutishauser is at the Oeschager Centre for Climate Change Research at the University of Bern in Switzerland, the findings do not fit in with the version of global warming now being purveyed onto the world. Blaming man for global warming is becoming a bit more difficult if the effects of climate change are not negatively effecting the environment.
Rutishauser claims that “a lot of work [will be needed to] revise modeling results for estimations of what’s going to happen in the future for food production especially.”
As always, the securitization of our food supply is a hot topic with climate change alarmists.
Eric Davidson, director of the Woods Hole Research Center in Massachusetts, says that developed countries have to cut their fertilizer use by 50%. Davidson also clamors for the populations of the world to stop eating meat. “I think there are huge challenges in convincing people in the west to reduce portion sizes or the frequency of eating meat. That is part of our culture right now.”
It appears real world observations do not fit in with the models that climate change alarmist would have us believe. This study shows this to be fact and not conjecture.
Yet, Wolkovich is appealing to citizen projects in various countries to find some shred of evidence to prove that the planet is suffering because of man’s impact.
So far, she cannot find the evidence. “We have very few monitoring networks. We need many, many people out there observing this because it is changing faster and across more habitats than we are currently measuring – we need more help!”
Related posts:
Views: 0
Posted in 
Tags: 
