This is appropriate given that two posts later, WUWT reveal what Professor Mann claims is science to be believed, when his computer-modelled graphs and predictions right from the start use a 2013 global temperature level already incorrect. That’s how their ‘warmist’ science “works”.
From this post we learn the importance and influence of the agenda factor – “Here is the IPCC procedure:
“Changes (other than grammatical or minor editorial changes) made after acceptance by the Working Group or the Panel shall be those necessary to ensure consistency with the Summary for Policymakers (SPM) or the Overview Chapter.”
Blatant admission from the IPCC that reports are amended to prove the premise that ‘man is causing catastrophic warming’. You can’t find anything clearer than that. Yet warmists persist in their false (demonstrably) claims and scaremongering lies.
Guest essay by Dr. Tim Ball
I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts. Arthur Conan Doyle. (Sherlock Holmes)
There is no more common error than to assume that, because prolonged and accurate mathematical calculations have been made, the application of the result to some fact of nature is absolutely certain. A.N.Whitehead
The recent article by Nancy Green at WUWT is an interesting esoteric discussion about models. Realities about climate models are much more prosaic. They don’t and can’t work because data, knowledge of atmospheric, oceanographic, and extraterrestrial mechanisms, and computer capacity are all totally inadequate. Computer climate models are a waste of time and money.
View original post 5,084 more words