Global drought may have changed less than thought
Simple models have overestimated drying over past 60 years
Once again there seems to be accumulating information that perhaps, just perhaps, we should take a collective deep breath and re-evaluate our response to global warming. As regular reader(s) no doubt know, I have strong opinions regarding global warming and the somewhat hysterical (in my mind) reactions. However, the typical GOP stance of simply ignoring that humans are totally trashing the planet is also terribly misguided. Humans are having a HUGE impact on our environment, I just try to suggest that the burning of fossil fuels is a rather minor part of the massive impact.
Anyway, since models are built on data, if the data collected is flawed somehow, then the models have no chance. The article seems to be a discussion about ways to extrapolate one measurement by taking a different one (in this case, ‘dryness’ based on temps). If that assumption was flawed (as the article indicates) then any conclusions based on that data must be reevaluated. What if, then, it is discovered that things (e.g., global warming) really aren’t as bad as first reported? In the world of ‘normal’ science (i.e., that not politicized), the authors would publish some papers based on their analysis and if their fellows doing the same research agreed with their data, methodology and conclusions, then the science would simply evolve. However, in our current idiotic situation (regarding global warming), people who just want to be scientists toiling away in obscurity now become the focus of a character assassination campaign (from either side, it just depends on what they are reporting). It is enough to make you take up astronomy or something!