March 14, 2013

Maybe there's something wrong with reality...




This piece, from BBC climate blogger Paul Hudson is a great example of how climate "scientists" baked their hypothesis into their computer models, the used their models to prove their theories. The basic theory is that since CO2 is a greenhouse gas in the laboratory, rising levels of CO2 in the atmosphere must also act as a greenhouse gas and warm the planet.

Now we have a scientific problem! Nature isn't doing her part. Nature must be adjusted! It never enters the minds of the cultists that maybe the models were buncombe from the beginning. Real scientists would be questioning the models right now.

And Mr Hudson, if he was a real science reporter, would be pointing out that the computer models were always fairly sketch compared with the unfathomable complexity of global climate. For instance they are too coarse-grained to model clouds. We can assume that variations in cloud cover and type should have a large effect on climate, but nobody can say exactly what that will be.

Also, we are told climate models are verified by using them to "predict" the past, and then comparing those predictions with the historical record. And yes, they do that rather well. But the dirty secret is that all the models are "tweaked." They are tested, and then adjusted. Adjusted to fit what? Historical data.

BBC - Blogs - Weather - Global warming: The missing energy:

...My initial articles created huge interest around the world. They aimed to highlight the fact that global temperatures had levelled off at elevated levels, despite ever rising levels of greenhouse gases, a situation which remains unchanged nearly four years later.  

At the time there seemed to be a reluctance to acknowledge such a levelling off in global temperatures, although this is no longer the case.  

But Dr Kevin E Trenberth of University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR) was one climate scientist at the time who did acknowledge this apparent lack of warming in surface temperature observations.  

It's now described as the issue of 'missing energy' - namely with rising levels of greenhouse gases, where has the expected extra global warmth, which basic physical laws predict, gone?...

Something I find interesting is that one of the underlying assumptions of leftist thought is that there is no human nature. What humans are can be changed. This is the same thinking that was behind Stalin sending geneticists to the Gulag, and feminists declaring that male and female are "social constructs." Or homosexualists doing the same to marriage.

Warmists seem to have a kind of analogous thinking. "Nature" is something we can just change. Gaia will conform to the models, or else! We humans are all-powerful, and can simply decide what the world is going to be like, and make it so.

All of these are intrinsically totalitarian, because they depend on forcing people to agree with "the model." They are also all intrinsically opposed to belief in the Judeo-Christian God, which always presupposes that there is such a thing as Truth, which we cannot alter.

Posted by John Weidner at March 14, 2013 9:21 AM
Weblog by John Weidner