Let's say you've been spotting dog poop in one corner of your yard. You suspect the neighbor's chihuahua, but you haven't actually seen him pooping. This morning you see him doing what dogs do, in the same corner of the yard where you've been seeing and smelling the poop. The next morning you see him in action again, and again the next evening.
A normal rational human, or a normal scientist, will conclude that the neighbor's chihuahua is the actual source of the earlier poops, which were small enough to be his product, not likely to be Great Dane poop. The scientist will use more precise measurements and more statistics, but the basic inductive reasoning is the same.
Not so for a Paranoid Religious Zealot. The PRZ will notice the chihuahua depositing poop, and instantly conclude that all chihuahuas have Jew-chips implanted in their tiny brains, which force them to poop in a Jew-coded way. He will then carefully scoop up the Jew Code Defecatorium, bring it into the house and try to decode the patterns, and (after appropriate rearrangement) the Jew Code Defecatorium will absolutely verify that the chihuahua is sending secret messages to be read by Jew satellites on Mars, thus passing orders to the guy across the street who is a 32nd Degree Mason and thus undoubtedly an Illuminatus.
= = = = =
Now for an article in latest New Scientist mag, headlined "Sun takes some climate blame, but most is ours."
Most is ours. Does this mean the "scientists" finally have any evidence of the connection between human activity and the earth's temperature? No, it refers to increased factual proof of the sun's connection to global temperatures, followed by a typical piece of Paranoid Religious Zealot "reasoning" by the "scientists".
The actual observation: "Planet-wide heating and cooling of the atmosphere during the 11-year sunspot cycle has been measured for the first time."
Evidence of longer-term solar effects has been clear for many years, but the fine-grained changes in the short 11-year cycle were not large enough to spot easily amid the huge variability caused by all sorts of other stuff. New research has managed to tease out the correlation between sunspot cycles and roughly 0.6 degrees of average variation.
If we had any actual scientists practicing in the climate realm, this observation should put the final nail in the coffin of the idiotic greenhouse "theory", but no.
Here we go on the paranoid merry-go-round:
"What will excite climate scientists most is that Tung and Camp are the first to measure directly how a given change in the amount of heat energy in the atmosphere translates into a change in [worldwide] temperature. Researchers call this the 'climate sensitivity' of the atmosphere, and it is a vital factor in climate research because it determines how fast the planet will warm as a result of climate change.
Tung and Camp say that [this correlation] shows that a doubling of carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere would cause a warming of between 2.3 and 4.1 degrees C within about a year. They say this makes the lower estimates of some models 'unlikely'. "
And this last point is what has the Gaia-worshipping PRZ's excited. More disaster! More apocalypse! More sin by humans! More reason to exterminate the entire human species! Oh boy!!!
Trying to pry this apart: The facts
of this new factual discovery, if they were treated as facts, would help to knock down the global-warming hoax, because the facts
make it clear that we are noticeably warmed and cooled by the 11-year solar cycle, along with the already-known longer solar cycles. Rational thinkers would treat this added evidence for solar influence as added evidence for solar influence, just as the observed squatting of the chihuahua is added evidence that the chihuahua is the main influence on your yard's odor.
In turn, this should decrease the credibility of theories about other influences (such as greenhouse gases) because those are not even theories; they are fraudulent superstitions based on a reverse reading of known data.
But that's not how the Gaia-worshippers see it. Instead, they treat these new facts
as nothing more than a modified parameter for their fraudulent models, a new code to be fed into the same wild axioms, leading always to the pre-determined conclusion: Exterminate humans! Exterminate humans! Exterminate humans!