LEFT PANICS OVER PEER-REVIEWED CLIMATE PAPER’S THREAT TO GLOBAL WARMING ALARMISM
Posted on: Thursday, February 26, 2015 Comments
Climate forecasts are lousy, so it is settled science that they must undoubtedly be based on lousy theories. And obviously, lousy theories should never be trusted.
Also, climate forecasts, of the type relied upon by the IPCC and over governmental entities, stink – no doubt. They are wrong. They have been promising ever increasing temperatures for decades, however the observations have been more or less reliable. And I think you can agree that this evidently shows that there’s something extremely wrong with the theory behind the models.
The paper submitted to the Science Bulletin of the Chinese Academy of Sciences – on “Why models run hot: results from an irreducibly simple climate model” - was quickly noticed, receiving at this writing well over 10,000 downloads. And, as expected, anybody who understood the settled science - that bad theories make bad forecasts - knew that this paper was a key challenge to the climatological community.
As it turns out, Willie Soon, like most research scientists, has in the past accepted money from sources other than our beneficent government. Greenpeace, for instance, often issues these kinds of grants.
Apparently, Greenpeace denies the settled science – the fact that bad forecasts mean incorrect theories. Don’t let them change the subject though. This is not about some false accusation of conflict of interest. In fact, this is about bad science passing for good only because it’s politically advantageous.
Clearly, Greenpeace would do anything to distract from the news that proves climate models are broken.
Add Comment
If you already have an account, please LOGIN.
If not, you may consider creating on. It’s FREE!
» Login
» Sign up