ClimateFaith

"More ozone and methane being destroyed than we previously thought," says Alastair Lewis of the National Centre for Atmospheric Science in Leeds, UK.

I know I'm starting to sound like a broken record here - a scratched CD - a half downloaded MP3...

I have contended on these pages that the Earth will not warm at the rate that the climate models suggest because they aren't factoring enough variables. There are a LOT of variables. However, three specific variables that I've never seen put into a climate model, because they're just too unpredictable. First, the heat sinks that are the Earth's Oceans. Second, the volatility of our atmosphere. Third, and most recently pointed out - Sun spots.

The Oceans not only absorb, but also reflect the sun's rays. More and less water change the equation for any climate model. It's too hard to predict, so that data is usually just ignored.

Second, our atmosphere. We know a little bit about how it works, but not enough to predict it. What happened to the Ozone layer? Why was there a hole? Why isn't there one now? Uh... Just leave that out, Timmy.

Ozone in the troposphere, up to 10 kilometres above the Earth's surface, is the third most important anthropogenic greenhouse gas after carbon dioxide and methane.

Yet climate models are not very precise when it comes to predicting where and in what quantities the gas is produced and removed. Part of the problem is that the molecule is largely recycled above the tropical oceans, where data is sparse.

When they began to measure how the concentrations of ozone in the troposphere varied over time, they discovered that 13% of ozone is lost each day in this area, not 8% as predicted by models.

Third, Sun Spots. According to some of the things I've posted here for you to absorb - to toss out as an alternate point of view to the norm (again, check the masthead) the temperature of the earth MIGHT actually be related to the fluctuations of the giant nuclear fireball in the center of our solar system. Fancy that?

Here's the thing - I'm not sure. I'm not positive that I'm right. There, I've said it. Problem here, is that there isn't a debate. There's only junk science and the blind religion based on "Climate Change" band-waggoning. Non-thinking, blind acceptance to something that has not yet been observed in more than an anecdotal fashion... THAT IS NOT SCIENCE. That is FAITH....

So I'd like to start calling those that blindly follow this religion of ClimateFaith, ClimateThumpers.

I think I better get off the chair here before I get hurt.
Here's the link to the article from NewScientist

And here's a link to another trusted source.