Posted on 05/25/2016 5:43:27 AM PDT by IBD editorial writer
The global warming alarmists tell us to trust the science. But when it comes to climate studies, there’s less science and more accounting going on there.
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
If the “climate models” were actually any good, they could be set to the conditions of 1916, and then run to produce a hundred-year “forecast” which matched the historical record of the last century.
If that could be done, they would have done it and the climate “scientists” would be shouting it from the rooftops.
But they are, obviously, not.
Because they can’t.
Because the models are crap.
Their focus isn’t on seeking the truth, it’s on shaping their vision of the truth.....
Pretty ridiculous for lefties to claim settled science when there isn’t agreement on the model.
If you don’t have a definitive and accurate model, you can’t claim conclusions derived from those models are accurate.
If the models are accurate, we don’t need government subsidy of climate research right? Just run the model. Good way for gov’t to cut spending.
Want an example of what is actually settled science? How about the law of gravitation? This can be reproduced in the lab repeatedly around the world. It is settled science that matter accelerates under the influence of gravity.
Incidentally, that’s why we don’t need government funding to determine whether or not this acceleration occurs.
To help understand what's going on, here is an exact equivalence:
Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) is to true science as crony-capitalism is to capitalism.
Both examples are abject lessons in monstrosities created when otherwise worthy activities marry into Big Government.
I have yet to see one scientific study of the earth's climate that was done using anything remotely resembling scientific methods. That's because it's impossible to conduct a scientific experiment in a "laboratory" where you can't control the conditions, and where there are too many variables that you can't account for in your study.
The article is dead on. I used to create computer models in Grad School.
To do a model, you start with a theory and program to that theory; then you test the model on known, historical data to verify it works. No climate model has ever been verified for the last century and been correct as of today.
But we’re supposed to destroy our lives because of some knuckleheaded gibberish.
I’ll believe in climate change when NY has 27 tornadoes in one day as Kansas did yesterday. Now that would get the attention of skeptics.
I am a Climate Model Denier, and proud of it!
The models are invalid, as they have never been validated. Hence they are fake, junk science. And, need observations fall outside their predications. Fail. A guess or monkey with a dart board is as relevant as climate models.
The trick is to understand which ones are useful, and then learn from them. The Global Warming cultists haven't figured that out yet.
Heat waves from the past...
NYC: 1879, 1882, 1883, 1895, 1896( a brutal one!), 1900, 1936, 1937, 1972.
Michigan: 1962, 1963.
Tulsa OK: 116 degrees in 1936 and 1984. I remember downtown Tulsa at 105 degrees May 5, 1972.
B4l8r
Precisely.
Oh, they’re PLENTY useful. Just not for predicting the climate 100 years from now.
But as a cash cow, they give a LOT of milk. I’d say that’s useful. To somebody.
That the climate alarmists call anyone who disagrees with their theories a “denier” shows that climate change is a cult religion and anyone who disagrees with their dogma is a heretic.
You can create a model that perfectly predicts the historical record because it's made from the historical record. It's done all the time for the stock market. "Backtesting" will show a model does an admiral job of laying out the patters of a given stock. But the measure of a model is the ability to test the future and matching the past isn't sufficient. That's why stock traders aren't all billionaires now.
So far we have 20 or 30 years of attempts and the climate models suck at predicting the future.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.