^
You aren't worth having a discussion with, becuase you have assumed what my position is, and fail to read what I actually say. You say that I think the whole thing is BS, which I do not. You say I am countering global trends, but no, I am referring specifically to data in Canada. Maybe try to read my words before countering points I am not making. It seems to be a common tactic of people who don't want to discuss real data when it is inconvenient to the hysteria, and are zealots in their defence such that sweeping general claims are the only way to get their point across. Science is about discussing the anomalies. It isn't a religion.
That, and your interpretation of the last point is baffling. You bold the last part of the sentence, which is the part that agrees with what you are saying, but the entire sentence from beginning says the opposite of what you are saying. Here ya go, maybe read it 3 times, the whole sentence this time: "In summary, neither our model projections for the 21st century nor our analyses of trends in Atlantic hurricane and tropical storm activity support the notion that greenhouse gas-induced warming leads to large increases in either tropical storm or overall hurricane numbers in the Atlantic". Bolding the last bit makes it look like the opposite of what it says.
And forgive me for not putting any weight in what a model is saying will happen in 50 years. Nonsense.
Anyway, you refuse to actually read what I write, and put your spin on my thoughts, so I'm not going to carry on with you.
|