Posted on 08/26/2015 1:13:01 PM PDT by Lorianne
The “official” models are also absurd mathematics. There are more variables than equations available.
Even with supercomputers, garbage in, garbage out.
Yea but they come up with nonsense REALLY fast so there’s that...
Those “variables” are more accurately described as “Finagle Factors”, a most ingenious mathematical model by which any answer found to not agree with the predicted outcome, may be inserted into the equation and - Voila! - the “right” answer cranks out just about every time.
ON EXPERIMENTS
(The first four laws are the only ones dignified by number. Note the beauty and simplicity of the First Law. Also, note that the three remaining laws refer to men’s reactions to Nature - not to Nature itself).
FIRST LAW: If anything can go wrong with an experiment, it will.
SECOND LAW: No matter what result is anticipated, there is always someone willing to fake it.
THIRD LAW: No matter what the result, there is always someone eager to misinterpret it.
FOURTH LAW: No matter what occurs, there is always someone who believed it happened according to his pet theory.
THE LAW OF THE TOO-SOLID GOOF:
In any collection of data, the figure that is most-obviously correct - beyond all need of checking - is the mistake.
COROLLARY I: No one whom you ask for help will see it either.
COROLLARY II: Everyone who stops by with unsought advice will see it immediately.
FINAGLE’S CREED: Science is Truth - don’t be misled by facts.
FINAGLE’S MOTTO: Smile - tomorrow it will be worse.
Yup (GASP! we agree on something)
Most of it is not derrived from first principles and they can’t get a handle on water vapor (clouds). Otherwise, they fail to recognize that it is a chaotic system that they don’t understand.
In the end times, wonders will be common...
Anyone who has any idea of what a Lorentz Attractor is, knows that chaos theory totally debunks any ability for long range weather prediction.
It’s called “sensitive dependence upon initial conditions”.
Global warming is bunk.
“Climate change” is not, because we all KNOW that the climate changes all the freaking time. The land upon which New York City now stands used to be under more than a mile of ice. The idea that mankind can have any ability to predict where the “initial conditions” will lead to a hundred years from now is out to lunch.
All that supercomputers do is get the garbage out faster.
Physicist Howard Hayden's one-letter disproof of global warming claims [pre-Climategate]Dear Administrator Jackson:
I write in regard to the Proposed Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act, Proposed Rule, 74 Fed. Reg. 18,886 (Apr. 24, 2009), the so-called "Endangerment Finding."
It has been often said that the "science is settled" on the issue of CO2 and climate. Let me put this claim to rest with a simple one-letter proof that it is false.
The letter is s, the one that changes model into models. If the science were settled, there would be precisely one model, and it would be in agreement with measurements.
Alternatively, one may ask which one of the twenty-some models settled the science so that all the rest could be discarded along with the research funds that have kept those models alive.
We can take this further. Not a single climate model predicted the current cooling phase. If the science were settled, the model (singular) would have predicted it.
(excerpted from Professor Hayden's letter to Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator Environmental Protection Agency. More at link.)
Yeah, but it takes a lot of computing power to add in all the fudge factors to make the real data come out in line with the global warming model.....
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.