Top climate scientists admit computers got the effects of greenhouse gases wrong

That depends on how much profit or warm fuzzy feelings there is in it for the believers.

 

So instead of the earth being .03 degrees warmer... it is .015? (*)(*)(*)(*) me... the sky is certainly falling. This is just proof of that.

 

Absolutely. We are doomed...

 

LOL

The right wingers (who haven't a clue for the scientific process) are condemning the scientists for correcting their own errors.

Classic.

 

"LOL".


The leftwingers, who wouldn't know an actual scientific test/experiment (utilizing scientific method), if it bit them on the ass, are trying to pretend that the IPCC (led by a TRAIN ENGINEER,with a degree in ECONOMICS), isn't scrambling to cover their asses, AGAIN...after it has been exposed by the EMPIRICAL DATA...again, are "doing the right thing", all of their own volition.

 

LOL

Yeah. Efforts to reduce the damage done to Planet A, where there is not a Planet B, is obviously a part of a vast liberal conspiracy.

I wonder when the socialpaths will understand that the planet is more important than imaginary money...?

 

There are such things are BAROMETRIC CHAMBERS, in which ACTUAL CHEMICAL TESTS could be done, PROVEING the true thermal retention properties of ACTUAL CO2 levels,k as opposed to the WILDLY EXAGERRATED saturations they try to float by as their examples/"proof", wich is utter nonsense.

There is NO "damage" in the natural cycle of climate,and a warming planet,while it may shift rain patterns, will mean MORE ARABLE LAND.

Nice attempt to hide from you ridiculous proclamation of the Great Moral Disclosure, being EXPOSED by the FACTS..AGAIN,..has forced the Proven Liars of the IPCC into...being of their OWN VOLITION.
They got CAUGHT in their own BULLCRAP...again.

The "sociopaths" are those trying to fatten themselves offf of the earnings of others ( the UN, and world left) ,with no regard for the economic impact, based on COMPLETELY FALSE CLAIMS.

"LOL"..the absolute definition of the Middle School forum poster...."RLMFAO"....grow up.

 

More arable land = loss of natural habitat.

I wonder when the socialpaths will understand that the planet is more important than imaginary money...?

 

Scientists can claim whatever they like so long as this data is not manipulated to manufacture flawed analysis for the purpose of enacting legislation.

See... it is the disingenuous nature of the AGW community that brings rebuke from conservatives (some of whom are very familiar with scientific process and computer modelling. I can tell you exactly why their (*)(*)(*)(*) was (*)(*)(*)(*)ed up. Floating point rounding.) is that all the hockey sticks in the world will not stop this corrupt train from reaching the conclusion that they were right... and congress must act now to save planet Earth.

They were not "correcting their own errors" for any reason other than to explain why their fantasy based predictions were so far off the mark... it is not about preserving truth, but their own egos.

You note THEY have not come forward to the media for a mea culpa... no... got to find some more secret (*)(*)(*)(*)ing emails and documents and (*)(*)(*)(*). That just reeks of scientific principal now doesn't it?

 

HAW HAW HAW! Science is the process of learning. That's what science does. That IS ITS JOB.

 

So then when someone has idea they should go to the media?

That is nice.

I prefer clear concise reports being given to the media.

 

This is not, actually, new. This has been known for months. How (*)(*)(*)(*)ing long would you like to give them? I for one don't believe it is coming.

 

Until they have a clear and concise information.

 

So you agree then. Never.

 

HAW HAW HAW! Science is the process of discovery, not learning how to discover.

 

Wait a minute. This is not what we were told. We were told that we had an absolute fact here, verified by 99% of the Scientific community.

We were told that it is an absolute fact that human activity, especially the emittance of carbon dioxide, is warming the planet and an UNSUSTAINABLE rate.

Do you now support removing or reversing every policy (tax, rule or otherwise) that was passed or instituted in the name of climate change, now that you have stated that we have absolutely no clue what we are talking about at this time?

 

In other words, once their model failed to predict what was actually happening, they were forced to admit they were wrong.

 

Leftwads are never wrong or contrite. They press on. By any means necessary, baby!

You won't get any reply.

 

Yeah, and it's the "denialists" that are at fault here...still...somehow. Go figure....

- - - Updated - - -

Yep. They'll just roll right past this,and onto the NEXT LIE, without blinking an eye....

 

Computers don't get things wrong people do. Garbage in garbage out, meaning if you pour a bunch of numbers in and claim the apocalypse is neigh it ain't the computer that got things wrong.

 

Their models perfectly predicted what was going on. It just wasn't what their agenda needed.

95% of the models correctly modeled a chaotic global climate that can't effectively be modeled. That is the ONLY sane conclusion. OK, you could accuse all those scienticians of agenda politics instead. Maybe a little of both.

 

I know nothing about their models as I lost all interest in climate change once we found out all the data upon which the proof was originally based was fabricated at the University of East Anglia.

However, it certainly does seem that models, studies, polls etc. always seem to end up supporting the case of whoever is paying to have them done. A little fudging here and there to get the "correct" answer is almost always necessary when grants etc. are on the line.

 

Actually computers do get things wrong, lest we forget the chaos that rounding errors in Excel caused in international banking. When you are modeling an iterative system in hundreds of grid cells with countless data points computer approximation will yield errors. Computer mathematics is very accurate it is not 100% accurate. The more times you iterate any model and the more complex the model the more computer error will compound.

 

I don't need the Daily, you or the other deniers to exlpain it to me. Mother Nature already has, the land that was once called, tundra, classified with only grass growing because of the cold temperatures, now have large shrubs and trees growing. Look it up. Now even Russia is opening up an old Artic port because the waterways are more passible without ice breakers. The Inuets are saying the polar ice cap is shrinking.

Deny all that if you wish.

 

You do know that we are comming out of an ice age.