It constantly amazes me how completely cr*p the climate septics are. I dont mean the skeptics – e.g. Lindzen, who is a better met man than me, though he has gone a bit emeritus recently – I mean flacks like Milloy. If you want to be skeptical of GW, then the only real point at issue is “will be be a (very) bad thing”. That encapsulates two points: how large is the climate sensitivity, and how will the balance of good and bad effects work out, regionally and globally (and, in a hat tip to RP, but also to others, how large are climate effects in the face of rapid societal change anyway?) (this isn’t [WP:BEANS by the way; I really wish the septics would learn this).
But one point of GW that is totally rock-solid is that CO2 is rising, which is why fools like Milloy fling themselves at it...
And the same tripe at CEI. Must be nice getting paid for junk twice over. Sigh. So what about Direct measurements of atmospheric CO2 taken by scientists during the 19th century - beginning around 1810 - ranged from about 250 ppm to 550 ppm, with an average value of 335 ppm, according to Dr. Jaworowski.
This isn't even "are the obs CO" rises anthropogenic" (which is also rock solid, though its one step further on). This is "has CO2 risen at all"? To be fair, Milloy hasn't thought of this himself, he is only parotting Jaworowski. It is best ripped to shreds by a single graph, that Tim Lambert helpfully provides. Notice... the enormous scatter on the early values, and how much they settle down once
they have been appropriately massaged to fit political correctness reliable measuring instruments become available? If you're a septic, this is proof of some vast conspiracy; if you're sane, its proof that measurement has got better.
[Tip that got me started on this: MAY at RC, comment 139]
[Update: I added a category to this, "climate science", though not sure its quite right... Also, I've just realised that the Milloy pieces date from 16 *March* not April... sorry for being behind-hand -W]
[Update again: note that some sites (including the ever-reliable ;-) warwickhughes assert that what J said was Senate testimony. Note that JE points out that this just isnt true -W]