Hey guys, shut up. You aren't supposed to show all those graphs. Only the hockey stick! The Scientific Consensus is settled. No questions, please.
More seriously, I'm not confident of everything they discuss here, and I think they are cherrypicking.
Upvoted because some of it is useful, however. For instance, hurricane number/intensity vs time (Katrina wasn't caused by global warming folks) and computer model uncertainty (they are crap). It's well worth a skeptical read.
It's not a good idea to make statements like this. Weather systems are very complex, and we don't know if Katrina was caused by global warming or not. We just don't know what an increase in atmospheric CO2 will do - that's what's so scary about it.
Exactly _what_ is scary about not knowing? The post makes a point that no matter what the mechanism is, none of the variables involved is out of the "normal" range for the last 3000 years. Excuse me if I don't "act now!" about every thing that looks normal but is unexplained.
I'm not sure why Katrina is a good example anyway. It wasn't an incredibly powerful hurricane, it just hit a poorly-prepared place. Unless you think global warming causes people to build a city in a valley below a lake held back with a concrete wall.
Global Warming Alarmists seize every abnormal climate event as an opportunity to harangue us into regulating ourselves back into the Stone Age. Katrina was one such event.
More seriously, I'm not confident of everything they discuss here, and I think they are cherrypicking.
Upvoted because some of it is useful, however. For instance, hurricane number/intensity vs time (Katrina wasn't caused by global warming folks) and computer model uncertainty (they are crap). It's well worth a skeptical read.