Total Pageviews

Friday, May 29, 2020

Real climate science versus computer game "science"

Much of what 
is called “science” 
today does not 
fit the definition.

The worst aspect 
of modern  "science"
is the mathematical 
modeling used to 
predict the future. 

That modeling depends 
on many assumptions 
and approximations.

For climate 
science, an 
accurate climate 
physics model -- 
-- specific causes 
of climate change and 
their importance --  
does not exist.

Without an accurate 
climate physics model,
it is impossible to construct 
any general climate model 
to predict the future climate.

You could create 
a "computer game", 
and then call it 
a climate model.

But what are called 
"climate models" 
are only personal 
opinions about the 
(unknown) climate
physics model,
as chosen by the 
model's owners !

A full picture of climate 
systems depends on 
knowledge of 20 
or more sub-specialties.

No modeling team 
has all that knowledge.

The global warming
models, and those used 
for the COVID-19 epidemic, 
have no predictive value.



Global warming would 
seem to be based on 
an objective science.

You measure 
temperatures
throughout 
the planet, 
and debate 
the accuracy of 
those temperature
measurements.

You do not know 
the cause of the
measured warning,
because no single 
variable correlates well.

The CO2 level rose 
from 1940 to 1975, 
with no global warming.

The CO2 level rose a lot
from 2003 to mid-2015, 
with almost no warming.


The global temperature rose 
since the 1690s, starting 
long before burning fossil 
fuels could be blamed.


So why does the belief 
in anthropogenic
 (man made) 
global warming 
correlate so strongly 
to political party?

That's also true 
of the COVID-19 
disease.

The virus does not
distinguish victims 
according to 
political affiliation.

A recent Rasmussen poll 
asking about the economic 
lockdowns, found that 67% 
of Republicans, but only 24% 
of Democrats, agree with 
the statement, “It’s time for 
America to get back to work.”

It's true that the infection 
spreads faster in densely
populated urban areas. 

It's true the Democrat Party
is very popular in densely 
populated cities.

But what does that 
have to do with 
real science?

The drastic reduction 
in carbon dioxide 
emissions, due to 
reduced vehicle and 
air travel has been 
celebrated by many 
Democrats, and 
protested by many 
Republicans !

A prolonged economic 
lockdown hurts President 
Trump's chances of being 
reelected.

So it's no surprise that 
the pro-Democrat biased 
mainstream media promotes
the most alarming predictions 
concerning ending the 
economic lockdown. 

The mainstream media
do the same thing 
with climate change 
predictions.



Politicians know  
“No crisis should 
ever go to waste.” 

Every crisis, 
even an 
imaginary 
'coming crisis', 
can be used 
to expand 
the power 
of the central 
government.

An imagined crisis, 
such as the 
50+ year old 
claim of a coming 
climate crisis, 
is a political game, 
not real science.

Democrats claim 
only they have 
great respect for 
scientific knowledge.

In reality, Democrats 
only respect people 
with science degrees
who say what 
they want to hear.

And if they have a 
complex computer 
climate model,
as a prop,
that's makes them
seem more "scientific".

And never mind 
the many decades 
of wrong climate 
predictions ... that 
the mainstream media 
refuses to report !