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 : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (10743)	2/14/2017 1:49:09 AM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Recommended By d[-_-]b Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 356340

>> If you use surface temperatures Actually, the suite of 102 models used in this graph consisted of output from the CMIP-5 suite, and the resulting graph (the red line) represents the five year running average of global lower atmospheric temperatures which were predicted by the 102 models. That is, the CMIP-5 model outputs results comparable to the balloon and satellite data. The models are just wrong. And they've been wrong since forever. The data are getting better the models still suck. Which is, I suppose, why you have NOAA and others running around "adjusting" (LOL) the datasets to get different results. This is not science. This is fundraising.