“Of course it is guessed at. They struggle with the 24-72 hour forecast. How can they be even remotely accurate on the 25, 50, or 100 year forecast?”
This is a poor leap in logic that I have repeatedly tried to correct here.
I can’t tell if you are going to die in the next day, week, or month, but I can make pretty good guesses on your chances to die in the next 25, 50, or 100 years.
Weather is not climate.
Weather is not climate, it is true, but your analogy fails as well.
In a particular location, we can get a fairly good idea of a range of temperatures in a given month and or day; but we can no more predict a bias in the change of the average than we can predict the temperature 7 days from now.
The ability to predict the future weather from the climate records depends on a stable climate. Predicting changes in climate depends on computer models less useful, validated, and understood than models of the weather used for prediction of weather 7 days from now.
Good point. No. Weather is not climate but predictions are unreliable and inaccurate almost always. Of course that does not stop anyone. People have forever been trying to predict markets with little success. Yes, some hit it but not consistently.
Climate is as difficult if not more difficult to predict than weather. If you cannot create a scientific model to accurate predict tomorrow’s or next week’s weather, excuse me if I am a little skeptical about long range climate predictions.
Just as you note, I will die, perhaps wishful thinking on your part (seemingly you are not, congratulations), but cannot say when or how. I concede climate will change, and like my death no one can say when (unless there is a contract on me) However, to alter an entire economy or civilization according to these questionable models is silly. Of course climate alarmism is simply a convenient catalyst for altering society and gaining control over virtually everything. As George Will recently noted, environmentalism IS socialism.