But how does one determine if there’s global warming (or even the retrenched “climate change,” a tautology if there ever was one) if there’s no data?

Have you had a look at data provided by NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center?  Some of them are found at:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html#q1

Perhaps some other climatologists would comment on these data.

Good-oh

Astronaut Harrison “Jack” Schmidtt said today that he has been involved with the scientists who have been studying climate change for many years since his retirement from being an active astronaut, and that the factual data supports that the sun is the only force causing climate change, just like it did in past ice ages and warm ages.  He said further that the scientists who support a global warming theory are those who base all of their conclusions on computer models, but that almost all scientists who have tried to set up computer models agree that the issues are too complex for any current computer models to be accurate, other than the fact that the sun actually is in control of climate.  Like so much of our new age of enlightenment, we think we are in control and can change anything in our world by our own will.  It just ain’t so, and God knows it, even if we don’t.

What will the exact temperature range for the day be in Boston three weeks from now on the 19th of October?  Exactly how much cloud cover and rain will there be?  What will be the precise wind speed[s] and direction[s] for the day?  What will be the exact amount of precipitation for the day?

If the “science” of predicting climate change over the next twenty years is so accurate and so compelling that we must radically change our tax structures and entire industries to prevent global warming, then there should be no difficulty in providing precise three week forcasts for a specific city, should there?

On the other hand, if the models cannont predict the weather only three weeks from now, for a specific known geographic point, with at least a century of recorded weather history, how accurate can they be?

Yeah, I’ll just wait for the answer on that one…

The study of climate change has nothing to do with what will happen in a specific place on a specific day, or any such questions as:  “What will the exact temperature range for the day be in Boston three weeks from now on the 19th of October?  Exactly how much cloud cover and rain will there be?  What will be the precise wind speed[s] and direction[s] for the day?  What will be the exact amount of precipitation for the day?”

On the other hand, if you examine the NOAA graphs at the top of the link given in #2 above you will see a definite warming trend.  Anyone not interested in the data shouldn’t bother.  I expect Astronaut Harrison “Jack” Schmidtt has looked at these graphs and has talked with the “sun only” crowd.  They don’t talk much with the “greenhouse gas only” crowd.  The answer may be in between, but if we are past the tipping point no one can do anything anyway.

The study of climate change has everything to do with predictive computer modeling and my point was that if they can’t even manage to accurately make relatively simple predictions about short term local weather conditions, how can the models be trusted to accurately predict the enormously more complex global climate variables? 

We are currently experiencing global cooling, which coincides with reduced solar activity.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1658580/posts

Ah, but the long-range models can make some reasonable predictions about the gross trends in global patterns.  The short-range models are doing an ever better job predicting local features.  I have been tracking the quality of forcasting for over 40 years.  The new NAM (North American Mesoscale) model is better than the NGM (National Grid Model) which it replaced in March of this year.  The NAM looks ahead 72 hours and is about as reliable as 12-hour forcasting was 40 years ago.  Other products from NOAA’s Model Output Statistics Office reach out 8 days and while not perfect, provide amazing guidance.

I am not a reader of the “Free Republic,” but I think I can support their statement in the second line of the article you posted :  “Actually, global warming is likely to continue”.  As the trend marches hortter, of course there will be years that drop slightly —it is a “jagged” rise, not smooth.  Still it is a convincing trend.  Here is a quote from NOAA:

“The recent warmth has been greatest over North America and Eurasia between 40 and 70°N. Lastly, seven of the eight warmest years on record have occurred since 2001 and the 10 warmest years have all occurred since 1995.”

I think their data covered only the seven years 02 -08 — seven of the eight warmest years on record.