[sounding]

Originally Posted by Surf Daddy

I believe that I do understand science, and scientific methods. I have an education and experience to corroborate that. I believe in climate change, but not for the reasons projected by politicians.

I am tired of people categorizing me as being a science denier.

The climate change predictions are based on models. The models can easily be flawed for a variety of reasons. The outcomes can easily be manipulated by the algorithm as well as attributes used in the model. So here are two real world climate related examples. Consider the so called spaghetti charts used to predict paths of hurricanes, that the meteorologist point to, just days or even hours before expected landfall. There are 22 possible paths, with some wildly different. No model gets it right. Next, consider the weather predictions for precipitation. Last summer in Michigan, we had a day with a rain forecast of 0% chance for the next 12 hour period. You guessed it. There was a huge downpour.

I am not disparaging meteorologists. I am just saying that weather prediction is difficult in the very near term. Long term has to be orders of magnitude more difficult.

I learned a long time ago that data can be truncated, extrapolated or interpolated to prove any point you want to prove. This allows corrupt people to get the result that they want.

“Building consensus is a politico-religious concept, not a scientific one. Consensus involves creating broad agreement amongst a group of people, but science should never lean on agreement to provide a false sense of comfort. When forming their worldviews, scientists must emphasize the evidence, not the opinions of their fellow scientists.”

Agree -- consensus is not science ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1-FxwVkQ60