Do you know what this pretty picture is? Any ideas?Well this picture is the "science" that says that if we don't cut emissions the average temperature will rise by 2 degrees by 2100.
It is taken from the IPCC Third Assessment Report "Climate Change 2001"
This is where the magic 2 degrees Celsius that has been bandied about in recent days has come from.
And what produced this pretty picture do you suppose? Computer models, which all agree that the temperature will rise.
Now the equations that govern the earths climate system are very very hard. Of the very small fraction that have even been formulated none have analytic solutions but have to be solved numerically.
In addition they exhibit a behavior called "initial condition instability". What this means is that a minute change in any one parameter will lead to a vastly different outcome as the system develops.
This is not a concept readily reduced to a soundbite but the closest I can come is it says Nobody can predict the future with any certainty.
You could with equal validity produce any number of models and run them with any number of initial conditions - some will predict warming, others cooling. Since warming is required for political purposes, political natural selection will eliminate any that do not produce the required estimates of warming.
This is picture is not science my friends - it is voodoo, meaningless dribble to be used for double talking politicians and agitators to grasp further control over the population by limiting their access to resources.
Nobody knows what the future may bring and anybody who claims they do is a charlatan, especially when they put numbers on things such as what the average global temperature will be at some future date.
But I am pissing in the wind here, the "science" has been decided, except it is not science its more akin to necromancy.
And what produced this pretty picture do you suppose? Computer models, which all agree that the temperature will rise.
Now the equations that govern the earths climate system are very very hard. Of the very small fraction that have even been formulated none have analytic solutions but have to be solved numerically.
In addition they exhibit a behavior called "initial condition instability". What this means is that a minute change in any one parameter will lead to a vastly different outcome as the system develops.
This is not a concept readily reduced to a soundbite but the closest I can come is it says Nobody can predict the future with any certainty.
You could with equal validity produce any number of models and run them with any number of initial conditions - some will predict warming, others cooling. Since warming is required for political purposes, political natural selection will eliminate any that do not produce the required estimates of warming.
This is picture is not science my friends - it is voodoo, meaningless dribble to be used for double talking politicians and agitators to grasp further control over the population by limiting their access to resources.
Nobody knows what the future may bring and anybody who claims they do is a charlatan, especially when they put numbers on things such as what the average global temperature will be at some future date.
But I am pissing in the wind here, the "science" has been decided, except it is not science its more akin to necromancy.