2023-07-14
It's an irrelevant question if you believe that the IPCC is a political organisation that ensures its modellers simply produce the answers that their funding agencies require, but if you still believe that it's all totally above board scientific and impartial, then maybe this article goes some way toward explaining the disparity between the alarmist predictions of the said modelling and the actual progress toward climate armageddon exhibited by the real world.
This site still maintains that since climate science is probably the most complex topic known to man, and in light of the abysmal track record of climate predictions to come true so far, the whole idea that "the science is settled" amounts to utter and demonstrable nonsense.
But there are still scientists who are modest enough to acknowledge that they don't necessarily have a handle on the full picture.
So they do what they can to counter the bogus certainty of the politicians with a reasonable level of doubt, supported of course (as far as may be possible) with real evidence.
Nobel laureate Dr John Causer is one such:
"His studies of the science of climate provide strong evidence that there is no climate crisis and that increasing CO2 concentrations will benefit the world"
"Dr. Clauser has developed a climate model that adds a new significant dominant process to existing models"
Yes friends, it's another climate model, but not as we know them.
See what you think, and marvel that it has taken so many years to take this rather obvious factor into account ...
