Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: neolib who wrote (226490)	4/8/2007 9:56:19 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Excellent observation. The problem for you is that global warming fits most of the data, whereas you are left looking for anomalies. That is the point you just cannot understand I understand perfectly well that we are in a warming trend. We have been in one since 1750. What I don't believe is that the climate models "are working quite well". If they were working so well, we wouldn't keep seeing such radical changes every few years, or sea level changes more than 50% off the model predictions, etc, etc. Once again, the models are modelling greenhouse effects. They are not modelling the whole climate and they can't. But the greenhouse effect in nature does not operate independently of the rest of the climate, so the models are acutely dependent on their parameterization, and have not been independently verified. Since climate is non-linear and chaotic, I doubt it can be modelled. Does anyone claim he can predict butterfly effects? And that is based on my knowledge of the non-intuitive nature of chaotic systems. Saying the "trend is clear" assumes a linear system, which climate just ain't. Now maybe global warming will happen just as many think. But maybe not. The science isn't there yet. So keep studying, and take precautions that make sense anyway, but don't bankrupt yourself to take precautions that may turn out to be perfectly useless. As for Al Gore and the MSM reporting, it runs far beyond the facts as a matter of course, and generally should make anyone's bs meters ring long and loud. I know a mass hysteria when I see one.