Many times on this blog I have asked the question, "Where is the institutional incentive to disprove global warming?"
This question becomes pertinent when examining the recent headlines proclaiming that storms are now more frequent due to 'global warming' (which, as we have seen, does not exist at the moment as world temperatures are slightly below normal). A commentary in the UK observes,
As the great global warming scare continues to crumble, attention focuses on all those groups that have a huge interest in keeping it alive. Governments look on it as an excuse to raise billions of pounds in taxes. Wind farm developers make fortunes from the hidden subsidies we pay through our electricity bills. A vast academic industry receives more billions for concocting the bogus science that underpins the scare. Carbon traders hope to make billions from corrupt schemes based on buying and selling the right to emit CO2. But no financial interest stands to make more from exaggerating the risks of climate change than the re-insurance industry, which charges retail insurers for “catastrophe cover”, paid for by all of us through our premiums.
What do we mean by bogus science? As I have posted on this blog and elsewhere, the global warming scare is overwhelmingly driven by computer models. Here is what computer modeler Willis Eschenbach says about this latest "study,"
[Willis'] conclusion is worth quoting at some length: “When your results represent the output of four computer models, fed into a fifth computer model, whose output goes to a sixth computer model, which is calibrated against a seventh computer model, and then your results are compared to a series of different results from the fifth computer model, but run with different parameters, in order to show that flood risks have increased from greenhouse gases…” you cannot pretend that this is “a valid representation of reality”, let alone “a sufficiently accurate representation of reality to guide our future actions”.
Just a few days ago, I lamented the overuse of computer models in the global warming debate. The "study" cited above ignored the fact that the actual weather record shows no actual upward trend in storms.
Ignore the hype. That is all it is.
A present, there is no valid scientific evidence that storms are getting worse due to 'global warming.'