Many people
treat the subject
of “climate change”
as real science,
which it could be,
but rarely is.
Modern “climate science”
is mainly left wing politics,
"supported" by junk science,
... and so far climate change
has been very successful politics,
... using government bureaucrat
"scientists", and computer “models”,
as props, to scare the general public,
... and then leftist politicians
falsely claim they are very
virtuous people, who need
more government power,
ONLY because they are trying to
save the Earth for our children!
(It’s always good politics
to throw in the word: “children”
-- even better to add "grandchildren".)
The urge to save humanity
from harmless carbon dioxide
is a “progressive” false front
is a “progressive” false front
for their urge to rule.
The exact causes
of climate change
are unknown.
Therefore, it is impossible
to construct a correct
climate physics model of the
causes of climate change.
Without a correct
climate physics model,
a global climate model,
intended for predictions,
can not be constructed.
Today, all we have are
failed climate model prototypes,
based on the wrong theory
that CO2 levels control
the average temperature.
These Global Circulation Models,
or GCMs, have predicted, on average:
-- Triple the actual warming since 1975,
-- Significant warming
of Antarctica,
which did not happen,
-- Most of the warming
would be in in the
higher, colder latitudes,
but the southern half of the
Southern Hemisphere
had very little warming,
-- In the tropics,
there would be
an atmospheric
"hot spot",
about six miles up
in the troposphere,
but no such "hot spot"
has ever been found
with weather satellites
or weather balloons,
and
-- Relentless warming
was predicted for
decade after decade,
as CO2 increased,
but there was cooling
from 1940 to 1975, and
a flat trend (no warming)
from 2003 through 2018.
Thirty years of wrong
GCM predictions
are strong evidence
the primary
GCM assumption
has been wrong:
CO2 levels do NOT
control the average
temperature of our
planet.
All we have are failed
prototype models —
not real models of a
real climate
change process,
that could be used
for what-if studies,
and predictions.
So why do we continue
to call them “models”,
as if they have value?
Because GCMs are used
as props to promote
the CO2 is evil fantasy !
The failed prototype models
are nothing more than
the opinions of government
bureaucrat scientists, disguised
as complex mathematical models,
to impress ordinary people.
The global warming fantasy
started with some wild guess
predictions of a future climate
catastrophe in the late 1950's.
The fantasy has been elevated
into an "existential crisis",
for no logical reason.
UN bureaucrats used the
"coming climate crisis"
since the 1980s,
to promote the UN as a
global environmental
"government".
The UN formed a group
of “scientists" (IPCC)
who are all 'coming
climate catastrophe
believers', and lots
of environmental
activists too,
to "prove"
the unprovable:
'Man made CO2
will cause runaway
global warming'.
The only
educated people
on the subject
of climate change
are the skeptics:
-- We noticed
the 30 years
of failed computer
model predictions,
and
--We noticed cooling
from 1940 to 1975,
and no warming
from 2003 through 2018,
while CO2 levels
increased a lot,
contradicting the
greenhouse warming
theory.
A failed prototype
climate model
makes wrong
predictions.
A real climate model
makes right
predictions.
No real
climate models
exist today.
To construct
real climate models,
we’d have to
thoroughly
understand
what causes
climate change.
And we don’t.
"The whole aim of practical politics
is to keep the populace alarmed
(and hence clamorous to be led to safety)
by menacing it with an endless series
of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."
-- H. L. Mencken
"The urge to save humanity
is almost always a false front
for the urge to rule."
-- H. L. Mencken