Posted on 09/15/2008 10:21:37 AM PDT by Ben Mugged
“Recalling that people such as Robert F. Kennedy have called climate skeptics ‘traitors’”
Didn’t someone shoot him? Were they talking about warming back then?
The major flaw in climate models is probably what they call negative feedback. My major problem with the models is that they don’t predict anything. What good are they if what they say happens doesn’t happen? Measuring models against empirical evidence cannot disprove an idea as gigantic as two centuries of man-made global warming. But if I am not allowed to question the theory based on experience, why are they allowed to support it based on experience.
Cooling since ‘98, ain’t it great, warming’s still our fate?
Climate “Science” is all about manipulating data to get the desired result.
“global warm-mongers....”
A good term for Gorebots and their ilk.
The prediction of the models have to be “disprovable”. To date few are willing to explicitly state changes in a metric that is meaningful within a reasonable period of time. This is part of the source of the scepticism around AGW. Hansen’s predictions in 1988 seem to be “disproved” or “unproven”, if satellite temperature data is used but nooby is willing to definitively say it.
Well, actually, NONE of Hanson’s predictions (even from the very short-term models of 5-10 years) have come anywhere close to matching climate trends.
His BEST prediction (that of a 100% CO2 halt!) still shows a warming trend, but actual temperatures have declined for 10 of the past 37 years.
The only time in history when Hanson’s models are correct is the 1973-1998 rise. That’s it. Every other time in history either has rising temperatures with falling CO2 levels, falling temperatures in rising CO2 levels, or much greater CO2 levels than now with no change in temps, or much greater temperatures with the same CO2 levels.
One would expect that this would invalidate the entire hysterical movement, and marginalize it into irrelevance.
At least in the minds of normal, educated, rational, mentally healthy human beings, science-oriented or not.
That is hasn't is more puzzling than the hysterical worshiping of "computer models." The modern equivalent of throwing chicken bones. I know people either fear or worship what they don't understand; that goes double for "computers".
So many people have never head of GIGO?
Two terrific books everyone should read: “The Satanic Gases” & “Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500 Years”. I’d like to get copies to John McCain!
What hole has AlBore crawled off to during this election cycle?
When I was working on my PhD, I used a computer model. The thing I learned right speedily is that if the model doesn’t actually correspond to the real world situation, the it gives erroneous results.
Mine was a fairly simple physical model, but it still took several tries before the model predicted (or even imitated) the results that I got from real world experiments.
We need to see one good El Nino come and go and if global temperatures continue to be well below what the climate models predict, the global warming community will be forced to admit they have over-estimated the impact.
Current temperatures are about 0.5C (65%) below what Hansen predicted in his 1988 climate model paper (and the current climate models still predict the same kind of numbers).
But the current temperatures are affected by a La Nina over the past year. If the numbers stay 40% to 50% below Hansen’s estimates after an El Nino event, even Hansen will be forced to admit it.
Global Warming on Free Republic
Campbell Brown said the issue of Global Warming was settled, so I see no reason to question it.
thanks, bfl
...people such as Robert F. Kennedy have called climate skeptics "traitors", David Suzuki calls for their jailing, the Grist website called for Nuremburg trials for them, NASA's Dr. Jim Hansen calling for their trials for treason...November 2008 -- Be There!
““Recalling that people such as Robert F. Kennedy have called climate skeptics ‘traitors’”
Didn’t someone shoot him? Were they talking about warming back then?”
Liberals are allowed to return from the dead to express opinions. It’s kind of like voting.
You might be interested in the Journal of Hydrology article in the past few months. One of the global warming models was tested against actual data. Conclusion, it was pretty good at predicting temperature and precipitation one month out. It was useless at a one year and a thirty year prediction.
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.
