…should be treated like horoscopes.
We now know that the models can’t even forecast the past (and they’re extremely shoddy work on inspection), and they want us to rely on them to make trillion-dollar decisions?
…should be treated like horoscopes.
We now know that the models can’t even forecast the past (and they’re extremely shoddy work on inspection), and they want us to rely on them to make trillion-dollar decisions?
Comments are closed.
Why would you link to this moron? He asks this question:
“The big picture question is this: Is it really possible to accurately convert complex real-world situations into ones and zeros”
Then goes on to write about some sort on financial program he wrote. Obviously he knows nothing about partial differential equations, what they represent, or their numerical solutions, which is what global warming models are all about. And to answer his question, yes it is possible to convert complex real-world situations into ones and zeros, and it can be proven mathematically. I just finished (accurately) predicting some temperatures on a spacecraft, verified in a full scale test.
Having said that, accurately predicting the fluid dynamics and heat transfer of the atmosphere IS difficult, but it’s not guess work or magic as this guy implies.
Disclaimer: Nothing in this shall be construed as supporting global warming alarmists.