Posted by
Arnie on Saturday, June 30, 2007 8:09:22 AM
Amazing, the computer models that have predicted all of the hullabaloo about global climate change are flawed. The models seem to be nothing more than a bunch of matchsticks arranged in a pattern of some sort, and then the winds came and blew the sticks over. Huff and puff and blow the house down. Down it went. No substance to hold it together.
Why is it that only conservatives are skeptical of every global initiative to change the world? Why is that?
“In a paper being presented at the 27th International Symposium on Forecasting in New York this week, Scott Armstrong and Kesten Green audit the relevant chapter in the IPCC's latest report. [snip, snip] overlook scientific evidence on forecasting, the IPCC forecasts of climate change are not scientific". It’s all bunk.
“These various criticisms of climate modelling can be summed up in the following statement – there is no predictive value in the current generation of computer GCMs and therefore the alarmist IPCC statements about human-caused global warming are unjustified. Yet Australia has an Opposition and a Government that profess to set their climate policies on the basis of IPCC advice. Both also seem determined to impose an inefficient, ineffective and costly carbon trading or taxation system on the economy, for the aspirational absurdity of "stopping climate change". More...Quick, someone with influence, please grab a phone, and call that Gore fellow and tell him before he self-destructs. And while you are at it, call the headquarters of the Democratic Party and tell them before this word gets out. It’s going to ruin them, as so many people have believed this bunk and have already thrown away perfectly good light bulbs. Pass it on.
Why is it that liberals are fast believers in global initiatives to change the world?
Why?