Government Report Finds Drastic Impact of Climate Change on U.S
> WASHINGTON — The average temperature in the United States has risen rapidly and drastically since 1980, and recent decades have been the warmest of the past 1,500 years, according to a sweeping federal climate change report awaiting approval by the Trump administration.If that's the case, then wouldn't it already be born out in other widely available temperature datasets? No credible person denies that the global (and U.S. local) mean temperature has increased, this is not news.> The draft report by scientists from 13 federal agencies, which has not yet been made public, concludes that Americans are feeling the effects of climate change right now. It directly contradicts claims by President Trump and members of his cabinet who say that the human contribution to climate change is uncertain, and that the ability to predict the effects is limited.These are entirely separate claims. The author of the article is saying that the United States are warmer; then implying that the change is entirely man-made and detrimental to make a political point (in this case, a hit against President Trump, though I suppose it's a step in the right direction that NYT are now allowed to refer to the President as the President). (Edit: I should clarify that I'm talking about the link between the two clauses in this paragraph, which makes it seem like one supports the other when this is not the case)> and that the ability to predict the effects is limited.It is limited, the report details the limits, as do many other great sources. The climate models we have are about as good as the economic models; that is to say, they're basically useless for genuine predictions. They do not fit historic data without piles of corrections, some of which are dubious. There is work to be done.If you have data to back up your points, show the data. If you are making a point which is not supported by the data, don't use slight of hand to make it seem like it is.The reason that there are so many people skeptical about the alarming claims, is because the presentations have been so dishonest and manipulative. Public figures frequently grossly overstate the certainty of statements which are not really settled, and some climate scientists and academic administrators have been caught basically ganging up on people who do not present alarming news.I understand why some of you feel, as Fej says elsewhere in this thread, that "At this point, mass panic might be more effective than mass ignorance.", but it's important that we be honest in presenting what we know to the public.Every time you present an opinion as a fact, somebody somewhere no longer trusts you, and those people will be vocal and active in letting people know that you've been dishonest.