“Computer Models, Climate Forecasts and other Dice Games.”
By, Viv Forbes
,
Chairman,
The Carbon Sense Coalition today called for an investigation into the IPCC/CSIRO computer models relied on for the scare forecasts of drought, floods and rising sea levels.
The Chairman of “Carbon Sense”, Mr Viv Forbes, challenged the IPCC claims that their computer forecasts have a 90% probability of being correct.
“The World Bank computers did not forecast the Global Financial Crisis.
“The British Met computers failed to forecast Europe’s frigid winter.
“Computers were unable to forecast the spread of swine flu or volcanic ash clouds.
“Since the introduction of its new computer program Queensland Health has been unable to pay their own employees properly.
“And the Australian Weather Bureau cannot forecast next month’s weather.
“Yet we are asked to believe that the IPCC computers are able to forecast global temperature, sea levels, hurricanes, droughts and diseases for a century ahead. They promise that, if we just stop using coal and oil, everything will be rosy.
“That is like betting our jobs, our industry and our energy and food supplies on a roll of the dice in the casino.
“There are about 20 Global Circulation Models using variable assumptions that claim to represent climate processes.
“Every model uses suspect or manipulated data and disputed processes, is fudged to fit past data and its forecasts reflect the biases of the builder.
“In twenty or so years of forecasting, not one has yet made a forecast that has proven to be correct. Moreover, no two forecasts agree.
“But we hope one gets it right soon so we can scrap the other 19 and so save a lot of money.
“Until then, all IPCC forecasts should be written in pencil.
“And we should ignore them.”
This graph is taken from a presentation by Norm Kalmanovitch to GeoCanada in Calgary May 2010.
But they backed up all their research by cutting the head off a chicken and reading the entrails. Not to mention the Ouija Board research they've been doing. All very scientific. You peasants wouldn't understand.
ReplyDelete