Roundup of refutations of the newly released climate assessment

It's pretty well established that The Weather Channel has gone full-tilt leftist. The latest example is an article linked to on the homepage of its website, bearing the throbbingly purple title "Blockbuster Assessment: Humans Likely Responsible for Virtually All Global Warming Since 1950s." It's written by one Bob Henson, who has written a book called "The Thinking Person's Guide to Climate Change.

Here's the damn link. Geez, how I hate linking to anti-freedom-and-advancement dog vomit.

But now comes the part I relish: a round up of explanations of why it's a bunch of hooey.

Real Climate Science:

All that red looks pretty scary. Red is the color of fire, and it isn’t hard to convince some people that their carbon sins will lead to hell fire.

What they aren’t telling is that their graph and map are fake. They have no idea what global temperatures were in 1880, 1900, 1920, 1940, or in fact the present,  because outside of the US there is very little verifiable data.

Physicist Steven Koonin, who was Energy Department undersecretary for science in the Obama administration:

The world’s response to climate changing under natural and human influences is best founded upon a complete portrayal of the science. The U.S. government’s Climate Science Special Report, to be released Friday, does not provide that foundation. Instead, it reinforces alarm with incomplete information and highlights the need for more-rigorous review of climate assessments.

A team of some 30 authors chartered by the U.S. Global Change Research Program began work in spring 2016 on the report, “designed to be an authoritative assessment of the science of climate change.” An early draft was released for public comment in January and reviewed by the National Academies this spring. I, together with thousands of other scientists, had the opportunity to scrutinize and discuss the final draft when it was publicized in August by the New York Times . While much is right in the report, it is misleading in more than a few important places.

Climatologist Patrick Michaels, director of the Cato Institute's Center for the Study of Science:

Under the U.S. Global Change Research Act of 1990, the federal government has been charged with producing large National Climate Assessments (NCA), and today the most recent iteration has arrived. It is typical of these sorts of documents–much about how the future of mankind is doomed to suffer through increasingly erratic weather and other tribulations. It’s also missing a few tidbits of information that convincingly argue that everything in it with regard to upcoming 21st century climate needs to be taken with a mountain of salt.

The world is beset by many real dangers, but being cooked due to human advancement isn't one of them.