In a previous ‘C3′ article, it was well documented how badly the NASA-James Hansen climate model predictions have performed versus reality. Hansen long ago had predicted that if human CO2 emissions continued in a manner of ‘business-as-usual’ there would result exceptional, accelerating global warming.
What are the odds of NASA being so wrong for so long? What are the odds actual temperature would never exceed the prediction of the powerful, sophisticated computer simulations that billions of taxpayer dollars paid for, hmmm?
An incredible 1 in 134 million odds.
This is like flipping a coin 134 million times and it comes up ‘heads’ every single time – like almost impossible, no? As ‘C3′ has pointed out in numerous articles, climate model predictions are worthless, which this style of analysis confirms.
We would like to thank the master-bozo weatherman at the Weather wunderground.com for bringing this style of climate science analysis into vogue. And, btw, for an education of the real value and credibility of the master-bozo’s analysis, you’ll want to read a very competent scientist’s take on it – go read Lucia’s take down of this habitual, anti-science knucklehead.
h/t Steve Goddard for the idea of how to apply this amazing new climate science analysis technique. Should be fun to apply this bozo-technique to more climate doomsday “science” in the future.



Greetings,
Please allow me to correct:
“What are the odds of NASA being so wrong for so long? What are the odds actual temperature would never exceed the prediction of the powerful, sophisticated computer simulations that billions of taxpayer dollars paid for, hmmm?
An incredible 1 in 134 million odds.
This is like flipping a coin 134 million times and it comes up ‘heads’ every single time – like almost impossible, no? As ‘C3′ has pointed out in numerous articles, climate model predictions are worthless, which this style of analysis confirms.”
I believe that 134 million heads in a row isn’t 134,000,000:1
Just sayin’
Paul
Odds of 10 heads in a row is 1 in 1,024. So, it works out to be very close to just 27 heads in a row. Running it the other way, if you have a calculator that can handle 2 raised to the 134,000,000 power… 2^^134 is 2.1778071480e+40. 2^^1,000 is 1.071508606e+301 so, 2 to that 134 million power would be about 2.5e+6042… which is a very big number, eh?