3 ms·
You are disagreeing, but also agreeing with me. My point is that weird biblical cults believed disaster is 'right around the corner' and when the disaster didn
by ltbarcly3 7y ago
You are disagreeing, but also agreeing with me. My point is that weird biblical cults believed disaster is 'right around the corner' and when the disaster didn't happen at the appointed time, people kept believing it was 'right around the corner'. Global cooling has been debunked, but at the time it was something people thought was real and had a veneer of sciencism attached to it which enhanced it's credibility.
My point is that I have yet to see an academic model of climate change that under predicted the actual warming (or sea rise) that has subsequently been measured. You can interpret that in lots of ways, but what you can't deny is that if every model is over estimating, there is a clear systemic bias.
- itcrowd 7y ago> I have yet to see an academic model of climate change that under predicted the actual warming Well, here's one under prediction: Hansen made 3 scenarios in 1988 (A, B and C), of which A over-estimated the warming, B was almost spot-on and C was under-estimating the warming. [1] https://skepticalscience.com/Hansen-1988-prediction.htm https://skepticalscience.com/Hansen-1988-prediction.htm
- ltbarcly3 7y agoA linear extrapolation would have been more accurate than any of his 3 models.