<[i] I don't understand why people outside of the area think the climate models are wrong. [ii] My information from the lecturer who runs the climate modelling subject at Melbourne University is that the models are getting better and better all the time. [iii] I'd be very much interested to know what the source of this misinformation is, Tapdancer?>
Well Butcherboy,
[i] It's the people INSIDE of the area who are finally admitting the climate models are wrong. What do you think the IPCC was referring to when it suggested the "missing heat" was possibly going into the oceans? (see [iii])
[ii] By way of analogy: A football team finishing 17th on the 18-team AFL ladder nevertheless has been putting in the hard yards. Next season, the coach says that his boys are "getting better and better all the time". Correctly so, and because of the improvement, they end up this time in 14th place.
That's still below average. And still not good enough.
[iii] Source of MISinformation? If you want to call HadCRUT4 surface temperature and UAH satellite datasets "MISinformation", then you might want to take a peek at how this is creating some of the embarrassment. Check out denmor's graph in the first post of the thread "IPCC 95% was correct after all LOL". As you can see, the models have continued to diverge over the last decade or so from the reality of the measured data. Not looking good at all.
You'll have to now explain to us how that graph is part of your "conspiracy theory".
