View Single Post
Old 07-17-2019, 05:45 PM   #24
RIROCKHOUND
Also known as OAK
iTrader: (0)
 
RIROCKHOUND's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Westlery, RI
Posts: 10,408
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
it’s based on models. those models rely very heavily, on assumptions
about things like the atmospheres ability to absorb pollution, effect of ocean currents, etc. the more the
model relies on assumptions, the more speculative it is. which explains why their predictions have been so inaccurate. i’m not saying we don’t have a problem to deal with, but let’s be honest about how exact the science is.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
No.
A large portion of our understanding is based on direct measurements compared against the instrumental record and against the geological record, including things like ice cores. I am a field scientist, I am inherently skeptical of models, but when models have the ability to align well with observations (see Stephan rahmasdorf’s 2007 paper on sea level rise) using data not used to make the model, I take notice.

This (below) is a nice explanation of how climate models work, particularly about how the point of the models is to show the trends and not make a prediction of a date/time/magnitude. But you know all this, we have been around and around on this before. The whole political forum is a circle jerk of the two sides just aiming at each other same #^&#^&#^&#^&. Boring.....

https://youtu.be/3v9aRQpumPA
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Bryan

Originally Posted by #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&
"For once I agree with Spence. UGH. I just hope I don't get the urge to go start buying armani suits to wear in my shop"
RIROCKHOUND is offline