Skip to comments.How modern global warming science took form
Posted on 03/16/2014 6:33:06 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
The foundation publications for modern global warming science meet no criteria for valid science. Methodologies are not given, measurements are not made and evidence is not described. Instead, preposterous fantasies on atmospheric studies are glibly mentioned with self-contradictory blather. The studies consist of nothing but a desired end point with fictitious methods of deriving the result. --SNIP--
There is nothing but modeling in global warming analysis, the simple reason being that the complexities and randomness of the atmosphere are totally out of reach of the science that can be applied. Only modeling is obscure enough to evade accountability to outsiders and provide any desired result without criticism.
The problem is, such a standard is not science. Science has a purpose, which is to put an end to error and falsehood through verifiable procedures. Muddled procedures only promote the charlatanism which science attempts to correct.
(Excerpt) Read more at english.pravda.ru ...
No communist ever blew up a dam or shut down a major agricultural region for the sake of a lizard or a fish...
I’ve studied fluid mechanics, basic physics, statistical mechanics and meterology.
I wanted to see the equations and assumptions that go into a global warming model.
I can’t find them.
Can someone help me with this ?
I am open minded on the subject.
But I am suspicious when I can’t find equations.
But I am suspicious when I cant find equations.
Tweaks don't need equations.
There is another post here today about the privatizing of American science. I am all for it.
Global warming only exists because of government funding. Period!
Tis a sad day when our media and officialdom have to be schooled by Pravda.
Look closely at Agenda 21 and you may discover the real reason behind “climate change”.
Beginning with LBJ, the D’rats made a hard turn left and began adopting the Communist Goals as entered in the 1963 Congressional Record.
Today, most of those goals are formal planks of the D’rat Party.
2008: D’rats nominated Comrade Obamatollah
2008: CPUSA endorsed Comrade Obamatollah
2012: D’rats nominated Comrade Obamatollah
2012: CPUSA endorsed Comrade Obamatollah
Even an intellectual imbecile could connect those dots. Yet, at best, the “superior intellectuals” of the D’rats simply cannot grasp the reality they are communists.
Bump for later printing for my liberal art teacher neighbor.
Is it any wonder Putin has such a low opinion of the West? I imagine that opinion is shared by China, Iran, NK, al-Qaeda, & all the rest.
The inept Obama/Clinton/Kerry foreign policy is getting increasingly dangerous for the ENTIRE world.
When they build a model it has very few variables in the model, that is why they get such extreme results.
No, they start with their desired result and work backwards. THAT’S why they get such extreme results.
Liberal Arts teachers back charlatans out of a sense of professional courtesy.
These F’ers in Congress look at the 100 million plus that Gore skimmed using this false premise,and they want some for themselves.
You can find tampered data and biased procedures though. Global warming is a tampered thesis which gave Al Gore $100 the first 8 years out of office.
Buzzards don’t eat lawyers for the same reason.
No, they start with their desired result and work backward
s. THATS why they get such extreme results.
Statistics is a useful tool, but they are not using it for the right purpose. At best, statistics gives you another question, it NEVER gives you an answer.
But yes, I understand what you are saying.
As I seem to recall, the entire basis of the global warming hypothesis rests on the fact that CO2 has an unusually broad fluorescence absorption/emission band within the infrared portion of the spectrum. Where most fluorophores only absorb and emit within narrow 20 or 30 nm bands, CO2 has a very broad band of over 100 nm.
So there you go, something else to plug into the equations.