From the new National Academy of Sciences report on climate modeling:
Climate information is already being provided by a number of public and private entities in various capacities, and there have been numerous other calls for the provision of more extensive government-run climate information services. The committee chose to not weigh in on the debate about the appropriate role for the federal government in providing climate services. Rather, the committee notes the need for qualified individuals who can provide credible information to end users based on current climate models, wherever they work.
To address this need, the committee recommends developing a national education and accreditation program for “climate model interpreters” who can take technical findings and output from climate models, including quantified uncertainties, and use them in a diverse range of private- and public-sector applications.
Trade unions? Didn’t they get more money for exploited slaves – in the good old days? I thought trade unions were now extinct?
Can accredited be revoked when their services do not meet standards. Also, why do the people who’s models are not correct get a pass on being accredited? Why does using goverment generated bad models get a pass?
Ssh, not so loud!. They might hear you.
Perhaps they could form a trade union.
“the committee notes the need for qualified individuals who can provide credible information to end users based on current climate models, wherever they work.”
I fully agree. The one niggling problem is that “whereever they work” line. Currently, they don’t work anywhere.
“climate model interpreters” — Modern voodoo priests. I suppose that makes sense, since the these clowns think anyone who doesn’t agree are soulless zombies.
Experts who can interpret technical output and quantified uncertainties and use them in a diverse range of public and private sector applications? Wow, not science by press release and this weeks biggest skeer? What is the response from the modeling, expert community? I assume they are the expert interpreters? If so, we are putting lipstick on pigs.
as long as the existing ‘experts’ are not grandfathered in…..