Total Pageviews

Saturday, October 26, 2019

Climate "models" are designed to blame humans for climate change -- "science" by assumption

The so-called "models" 
over predict the rate 
of global warming 
by two to three times.

So they are failed models.

Yet smarmy modelers 
kept using their
computer games, 
and kept making 
the same scary 
"coming climate crisis" 
predictions, every year, 
for over 30 years.   

Always consistent, 
but always wrong,

There are no real 
climate models, that 
make accurate predictions, 
because climate change 
physics is still a mystery.

A real model requires 
a thorough understanding 
of climate change physics.



The half degree C. 
of global warming 
since 1979, measured
by weather satellites, 
could have had 100% 
natural causes, 
or 100% man made 
greenhouse gas causes, 
or some combination
of the two causes.

No one knows the "truth".


Climate "models" 
play a big role 
in the attribution 
of global warming 
to human causes. 

But the "finding" 
that humans 
are the cause of global 
warming, was the main
assumption used 
to program 
climate "models".

Circular reasoning --
the so called models 
conclude what they 
were programmed 
to conclude.

The IPCC's
politicized 
Summary for 
Policymakers 
is the latest 
assessment 
report (AR5)

The IPCC claims 
there are eleven 
"main drivers 
of climate change”.

The IPCC guesses 
how much each driver 
has done since 1750, 
which they call 
a “forcing.” 

The so-called climate 
models assume any 
observed climate 
changes, over 
that long period, 
must be due to
11 drivers.

But 10 of the 11 drivers
are from human causes. 

The only natural 
cause driver 
is changes 
in solar input  
( called “solar irradiance” ), 
considered to be 
so tiny, that it 
can be ignored.

The IPCC merely assumes 
all the drivers of climate
change are human caused. 

And, if all the drivers 
of climate change 
are assumed to be 
human caused, then 
all the observed climate 
changes must also 
be human caused. 



Here's what the IPCC 
claims to "know":
(1) 
An observed 
global average 
temperature change,
based on non-global 
surface measurements, 
with questionable 
accuracy, especially 
before 1920.

(2) 
What the "model output" 
looks like without human forcing.

(3) 
What the "model" output 
looks like with human forcing.

With only 1 tiny natural cause 
of climate change, out of 11 causes,
it's no surprise that a "model" 
can only show warming when 
human causes are included. 

The 18 "model" outputs 
can not change over time
without human forcing, 
because only one
tiny natural driver 
is allowed.

The fix is in: 
"Model" results 
must match 
initial assumptions.

And the IPCC claims
"models" prove 
humans are the 
sole cause of 
climate change. 

Anyone who 
believes this 
circular reasoning 
is a gullible fool.

This modeling is
just junk science, 
because the so-called 
models are programmed
to reach the desired 
conclusion.

There is no such thing 
as science by assumption,
or belief.