by Nathan Barton

The advocates for manmade global warming are indeed worthy of pity as they humiliate themselves with more and more outrageous and pathetic claims about the horrors of global warming, even as their past claims and predictions are proven to be as bogus as their so-called science.

The latest?  Claims by an archaeologist and her colleagues, digging in the Big Horn Basin of Wyoming, that global warming causes mammals to shrink.  PBS enthusiastically reports this latest danger, and other mainstream media take the story and run with it, like the Mercury News.  That rag’s headline talks about horses shrinking to the size of cats (house cats, not the big ones).  (Of course, in the Mercury News, the headline writer is even more stupid than the writer of the article: the “cat-size” horses from (supposedly) 54 million years ago just shrank down from “dog size.”  And no discussion of what KIND of dog: Great Dane or Chihuahua?)

The science in these stories and the theory (and here, I slight the concept of “theory”) – the hypothesis – that they report is so incredibly bad that I suspect ancient Mesopotamian astrologers had a better grasp of “science” than these in the media, or their “scientist” sources do.

Start with the paucity of data and the lack of controls – this is based on the supposed age (from 54 million years ago up to a mere 10,000 years ago) and the accuracy in aging fossils – specifically fossil teeth. And the huge number of assumptions about the size of the teeth, and the actual age of the individual whose teeth have been found.  Add to that the lack of precision of the weather records from “millions” or even “thousands” of years ago. Oh, yeah, right!  There WERE no humans (or aliens) maintaining temperature records in central-northern Wyoming 53 million years ago: the calculated temperatures are based on still more very limited data, assumptions, and pathetic efforts to prove the theories that are essential to their so-called science and (more importantly) their academic and “professional” reputations.

All of which makes their claim that rapid, manmade global warming will lead to shrinking mammals (except, contrary to the guys on The Blaze, humans) and reductions in the nutrition of vegetation totally ridiculous.  The very evidence that they use to support this claim makes it appear to be even more stupid; claiming that an “ancestral” horse the size of a dog “shrank” over a period of ten thousand years to the size of a house cat, placed beside a modern Morgan, much less a Clydesdale, makes the point that even by their own reasoning, the micro-evolutionary changes were fleeting.  You don’t get a five-foot (15 hands high) to six-foot-plus (18+ hands) horse from a supposed progression of global warming events over millions of years shrinking the horses, when the original ones were only 3 hands high.  If you start at 100% and three events each reduce the size by 15%, that drops you down to about 50% original size.  Does that mean that the ancestral Clydesdales were actually 30-35 hands (10-12 feet?) high at the shoulder?  Show me the bones, people.

The logic and reasoning process (if it deserves such a label) used to come to the conclusions is pathetic. And reminds me of the ludicrous joke called “economic analysis” used to demonstrate the value of government projects and spending.

We will do as badly if we allow our decisions about how we live our lives (including such things as how many “carbon emissions” we have and what products we buy due to their “carbon footprint”) to be based on this latest discovery, as we will do if we believe governments when they tout all the “economic benefits” of their bloated spending and increased robbery through taxes.

These shrinking horses are almost as unbelievable as the myth of government shrinking every time the tax collections and debt shoot up another ten percent.

Mama’s Note: I read that and about drowned my keyboard with coffee this morning. It’s really so sad to see such stupidity. Even sadder that there are inevitably people stupid enough to believe it.