That's alright, jopo. I get a strong sense you yourself are dissolving.Your argument has been that the models don't match reality, in that you believe - for reasons that you don't explain - that they don't show sufficient solar strength to create tropospheric weather. And you've argued that's because they are flat earth models.I've posted a paper that analyses the impact of that modelling simplification. And I have pointed to the limitations that causes. You know, transparency of the science and all that.And it shows that the modelling simplication slightly but consistently increases the solar levels by around 1%. Not decreases, but increases. And that effect is consistent over time so does not affect trends.
Yet you are bold and caps and red texting that it shows you are right about the models not showing enough sun. As if it is a major problem. It's not. You are backwards on the effect of this and exaggerating grossly.The models do a good job representing what is going on and predicting the observed warming. They aren't perfect, and scientists are aware of the effect of modelling simplifications. But as usual you are way over the top and back to front on this.
- Forums
- Science & Medicine
- IPCC energy budget logic and then the real World
IPCC energy budget logic and then the real World, page-132
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 38 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Featured News
Featured News
The Watchlist
AHK
ARK MINES LIMITED
Ben Emery, Executive Director
Ben Emery
Executive Director
SPONSORED BY The Market Online