"Accurate since the 70s?" That's really fricking weird, given that in the 1970s they...

Post #431,898 by CRConrad 12/9/19 10:41:37 AM 12/9/19 10:41:37 AM Reply	"Accurate since the 70s?" That's really fricking weird, given that in the 1970s they... ...were screaming about how the coming Ice Age would kill us all, and now it's Global Warming. Both sets of predictions can't have been true at the same time. Also: The findings confirm that since as early as 1970, climate scientists have had a solid fundamental understanding of the Earth’s climate system... Making that judgment presupposes that they now have a complete understanding of the system. How are they going to prove that? And: Since climate models have accurately anticipated global temperature changes so far, we can expect projections of future warming to be reliable as well. a) Predictions can happen to be correct, for a while, even though they're based on a flawed model. Usually, though, after a while they aren't correct any more. b) What's the time horizon on the predictions they're touting as correct? Probably not all from the actual 1970s, so mostly decidedly less than 50 years? -- Christian R. Conrad The Man Who (used to think he) Knows Fucking Everything Mail: Same username as at the top left of this post, at iki.fi
Post #431,901 by drook 12/9/19 6:44:06 PM 12/9/19 6:44:06 PM Reply	That would be a devastating point ... if it were true https://skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s-intermediate.htm "1970s ice age predictions were predominantly media based. The majority of peer reviewed research at the time predicted warming due to increasing CO2." Don't like that source? How about this one. https://www.climate.gov/teaching/resources/70s-they-said-thered-be-ice-age "Although some people think that scientists predicted global cooling in the 1970s, that is not the case. There were a few predictions of cooling, but the majority of climate scientists in the 1970s predicted warming, not cooling." -- Drew
Post #431,902 by Andrew Grygus 12/10/19 2:50:12 AM 12/10/19 2:50:12 AM Reply	Back in the 70's I was associating with . . . . . various eco-freaks. There was one guy making the rounds preaching the coming ice age. He was a "one book wonder". He read a book, believed it was true, and rejected all other input. He was a "true believer" - reality could not impinge on his belief.
Post #431,907 by mmoffitt 12/10/19 8:10:00 AM 12/10/19 8:10:00 AM Reply	Republican, was he? bcnu, Mikem It's mourning in America again.
Post #431,908 by Andrew Grygus 12/10/19 1:26:16 PM 12/10/19 1:26:16 PM Reply	No, he was just an eco radical. The Republicans hadn't latched on to the climate thing yet, and the politics of the eco-freaks were still very local in those days.
Post #432,032 by CRConrad 12/21/19 12:49:28 PM 12/21/19 12:49:28 PM Reply	OK, could be that the Ice Age thing was exaggerated. Still, as you say, that's what won the media war, so that's what we heard. The other point still stands, though: "Our methods back then were flawed, but now they're correct." Sure, lord Kelvin, sure. -- Christian R. Conrad The Man Who (used to think he) Knows Fucking Everything Mail: Same username as at the top left of this post, at iki.fi
Post #432,035 by drook 12/21/19 4:52:34 PM 12/21/19 4:52:34 PM Reply	No they weren't The methods back then yielded mostly the right results. The results have gotten stronger. -- Drew

Welcome to IWETHEY!