Mainstream Politics and Economics Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Mainstream Politics and Economics

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Alastair McIntosh who wrote (653)	9/3/2011 6:05:13 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	5 Recommendations Read Replies (1) of 85487

How could you attempt to predict temperatures into the future without modelling? (I'm not suggesting that the current models are not failing.) You couldn't. But (and it's a big 'But') you have to be very sure of the validity of your models to read off future results and proclaim: that's what's going to happen. You have to verify your model, or at the very least have it successfully use past data to predict recent past data WITHOUT the addition of arbitrary parameters to fudge the results. None of the current climate models pass this test, yet we are routinely told to believe their (varying) results like Gospel, even 50 or 100 years out into the future. Now the results of CERN's CLOUD experiment have cast severe doubt on the accuracy of the current climate models' handling of cloud formation. Yet the adherents of the AGW religion keep proclaiming 'nothing to see here, move right along.' If you are old enough to remember the predictions of the early 1990s (I am), then you know the 1990s climate models were unsuccessful in predicting global temps in 2010. They said if CO2 kept going up (it has), so would temps. Yet temps stopped rising in 1998.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next