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 (22358)	6/22/2017 1:17:14 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 364847

Paraphrasing Judge Learned Hand, if the author didn't mean what he said he should have said so. I love this comment in your post: "In case you missed it, Michael Mann has just been recognised for his important contribution to climate science communication, being awarded the prestigious seventh annual Stephen H. Schneider Award for Outstanding Climate Science Communications from Climate One at the Commonwealth Club. I can't see Ryan Maue or Anthony Watts ever being recognised in this way. " Just hilarious. Let's attack the messenger and try to discredit him. Oh, yeah, then they attack his source, which was a copy of the article that appeared at Daily Caller, since that happened to have been the first place to include the story before it became widespread. There was never any doubt the Warmists would try to soften the position. The bottom line is IT IS WRONG. When the models are wrong they're wrong. "Forcings" (in other lines of work we call them "fudge factors" or "squeezing" or "plug", but they all mean the same thing). Of course the numbers used to plug unexplained differences are wrong. They will need to write more papers and see whether they can make a cogent point out of it. I can't find anything that would allow you to call the models "right".