3 ms·
At this point I'm not sure you're not a troll ; or do you hope noone will actually click your links and check facts stated there ? I will quote here: 'The take
by YarickR2 7y ago
At this point I'm not sure you're not a troll ; or do you hope noone will actually click your links and check facts stated there ?
I will quote here:
'The take-home message should not be "Hansen was wrong therefore climate models and the anthropogenic global warming theory are wrong;" the correct conclusion is that Hansen's study is another piece of evidence that climate sensitivity is in the IPCC stated range of 2-4.5°C for 2xCO2.'
I'm not sure how this correlates with your 'Hansen has been extremely accurate' claim, but you're clearly not helping with your references
- yongjik 7y agoOkay, you made me actually click through the link, and I can find: > As noted above, Hansen's model overpredicted the ensuing global warming thus far by approximately 15 to 25%. Thus if we estimate that the sensitivity of his model was 15 to 25% too high (which is an oversimplification, but will give us a reasonably accurate back-of-the-envelope estimate), ... Predicting global warming for ~30 years within 25% in 1988 seems "pretty accurate" to me, isn't it? Surely it's a far cry from the skeptical position that models are so wrong that we can gain nothing from them.