is really focused on heat waves vs average temperatures. I know, he is specifically responding to their arguments about extreme heat so perhaps that is why he drills down in this way.

Another example of how data can be manipulated to tell you what you want to hear and “prove” your hypothesis. Slide the time frame a decade and a trend line may look drastically different. I have seen very intelligent people cost companies millions over convincing arguments using data manipulation. They can stand behind “facts” and they aren’t lying. The facts are simply used to tell their truths.

I do have concerns with the accuracy of some forecasts and the people who are making these projections. As he points out, this is their career and their career exists thanks to funding and public support. Just like the SPCA needs to show you starving, sad animals to get donations, these scientists take a similar approach. This isn’t saying they are lying, it’s simply a tactic. They tell us the worst (average daily global temps are increasing, CO2 at highest levels ever) but withhold the positive (extreme weather is decreasing, deaths from natural disasters is decreasing). Just like statistics can be used to prove their point, they can also tell us part of the story. Since public opinion view their stance as being legitimate (good) and the anti global warming people are seen as kooks (the bad) it makes their approach easier.

In my opinion, if there is a conspiracy imho, I think it’s that climate change is a marketing campaign. It is the global scare campaign to drive conservation and renewables because natural resources are limited and with our growing population we will deplete them quickly. We must have a backup plan. We will run out of oil, we will run out of gas, we will run out of farm land, we will deplete groundwater. There is no denying this. These are not unlimited resources.

Again, I’m not denying climate change. I simply believe the picture is not completely clear because both sides are motivated to use statistics to back their arguments. We don’t have a clear understanding. That being said, reducing greenhouse gases occurs when we are using less fossil fuels. I can 100 percent get behind that.