The graph released a couple of months ago by Roy Spencer our ally who is in charge of the satellite program on weather at Huntsville with John Christy, was a killer. The graph showed clearly the divergence of the IPCC modeler’s predictions from the actual. That’s called failing the forecast test–why are we not surprised? Spencer/Christy showed that there is no reason to consider the IPCC reliable on anything. They had the evidence.
The divergence naturally makes for a fine opportunity for our side to talk modeling and forecasting. Realists, represented by the three high flying experts who authored the piece linked below, talk modeling, forecasting, computers, Garbage in Garbage out and indirectly, my favorite Cargo Cult Science. Cargo Cult science should be a concept everyone understands–after looking at Junk Science. No scientist, no matter how corrupted, stops wearing his white coat and pretending he is doing science. It’s the charlatan’s game, their whole game–reinforced by true believing media and politicians/chattering class.
Green and Armstrong the first two authors, study forecasting–big time. Willie Soon is greatly respected and highly regarded as a climate realism physicist specialist by the people on the Milloy and Dunn side of the argument.
So here we go.
I know two of these guys, Armstrong is a forecasting expert—Wharton School,
Willie is a physicist at some place in Boston, as a recall.
Their essay is linked below.
I asked Armstrong one time after his lecture if maybe his long list of factors to consider in forecasting (120 plus) wasn’t a ready made list of excuses if the forecast goes wrong.
I was not satisfied with the answer, but I am sure he wasn’t either—the more you know the better you can predict, as long as the knowledge is reliable—like in physics and such, however he was making the case for economic and politics forecasting—which ain’t knowable very well at all, and the proof is in the pudding, since economics and political/social forecasting is a rough brand of informed guessing with a lot of room for error.
too many uncertainties in a vastly complext societal environment—not good for relaible forecasting.
Willie is the always friendly and charming genius, who treated me nice even though he knew I probably went into medicine to avoid hard stuff like higher math and the physical sciences.
I be happy in the uncertain world of biology and medicine that ignores molecular level and goes for rough observational studies that we call evidence and physicists would call a guesstimate based on a estimate based on an enigma inside a riddle with some Kentucky windage.
http://www.humanevents.com/2013/10/24/the-science-fiction-of-ipcc-climate-models/