Chicken-Little Cortez Caught Out By Science.

[Ninurta]

With the above Finnish studies stating that man-made climate change is a pile of bullshit, it's obvious
that the Establisment media had to rush out with a piece to stop the peasants from realising another
narrative that poo-poohs the worship of carbon credits.

'No doubt left' about scientific consensus on global warming, say experts.

... This localisation is markedly different from the trend
since the late 21st century when records are being broken year after year over almost the entire globe, including this
summer’s European heatwave. ...

They should probably revisit their estimate once we are beyond the end of the 21st century. We are currently barely past the beginning of it, and have no Earthly idea what the LATE 21st century will look like, much less having passed it.

Major temperature shifts in the distant past are also likely to have been primarily caused by volcanic eruptions, according
to another of the studies, which helps to explain the strong global fluctuations in the first half of the 18th century as the
world started to move from a volcanically cooled era to a climate warmed by human emissions.

Got it. Volcanoes, which spew heat and fiery lava (along with crap-tons of CO2), are actually air conditioners, cooling the planet, whereas humans, who spew considerably cooler things, are actually heating the planet. Got it. Makes sense... in a Leftist, carbon-credit worshiping sort of way.

Commenting on the study, other scientists said it was an important breakthrough in the “fingerprinting” task of proving
how human responsibility has changed the climate in ways not seen in the past. “This paper should finally stop climate
change deniers claiming that the recent observed coherent global warming is part of a natural climate cycle.


This paper shows the truly stark difference between regional and localised changes in climate of the past and the truly
global effect of anthropogenic greenhouse emissions,” said Mark Maslin, professor of climatology at University College
London.

Oh, I see. This is not really a "science" paper, it's a cleverly disguised political hit piece attempting to silence opposing voices. How clever of them!

The pushback has been political rather than scientific.

Just as (as demonstrated above) the "paper" was political rather than scientific. What kind of "pushback" do they expect from a political hit piece?

“As expertise in climate science increases, so too does agreement with human-caused global warming,” Cook wrote
on the Skeptical Science blog. “The good news is public understanding of the scientific consensus is increasing.
The bad news is there is still a lot of work to do yet as climate deniers continue to persistently attack the scientific
consensus.”...'

Note too the use of the pejorative term "climate deniers", and the persistent (and erroneous) continual use of the term "scientific consensus".

This was a political hit piece, nothing more. It's likely the original paper was as well, or at the very least a puff paper intended only to support a political narrative. There are too many errors for me to think otherwise.

,