Re: Belief has nothing to do with it: The fundamental difference between religion and science
The problem is that the models are continually getting it wrong. The data is going in, the algorithms are being crunched and future trends are being predicted that are completely out of the ball park. Why is this? Is it because we do not understand the feedback mechanisms? More than likely! Co2 has a tiny GWP and global greening is absorbing far more than we could ever imagine; Could it simply be that the world can easily cope with anthropogenic co2 without changing any more than it ordinarily would. We know that the planet can cope with far more co2 than we can produce and we know that the climate will always change The problem that I have with climate "science" is that when we get data like the Vostok ice cores we are saying "Ok we know that Co2 is causing climate change so why is the data showing that past rises in temperature precede rises in Co2". There is not a single climate scientist working on the theory that the model of anthropogenic Co2 driving climate might be wrong (because they are all following the money). What science shows us is that Co2 is a greenhouse gas; what it has failed to do up until now is show us that when combined with other elements releasing more than a certain amount into the atmosphere will drive climate change. All we know at the moment are that the models are too inaccurate to make predictions and that notwithstanding the political bias, the truth is that the science is far from settled.