[LINK] Scientists offered cash to dispute climate study

Bernard Robertson-Dunn brd at iimetro.com.au
Sun Feb 4 21:15:29 AEDT 2007


rchirgwin at ozemail.com.au wrote:

> Well: I could suggest that "an awful lot of scientists endorse the 
> models, and dissect their flaws, and work to improve them, and do not 
> substantially reject the hypothoses which arise from the models." I 
> doubt if you or I could assess the validity of the models to any great 
> degree.

There are some of us who could assess the models though. I did a PhD in 
computer modelling thirty odd years ago and the one thing it taught me 
is not to trust anyone else's models. I know what my models tell me and 
how far to trust them, but I don't know what other people's models mean. 
And I don't trust other people to tell me.

 > Or to put it another way: I know (roughly) how science works,
> and I know how think tanks work. So I am more likely to trust the 
> science than the think tank.
> 
> Or to put it another way: the science is probably good enough that the 
> modelling is accurate in nature but still has scope for error in degree.

I doubt that the modelling is particularly accurate, but the trends are 
frightening. To me it is the knowledge that we don't know what or when 
is going to happen next that is of th emost concern. We need to learn to 
live with the unpredictability, not try and change it.

-- 

Regards
brd

Bernard Robertson-Dunn
Sydney Australia
brd at iimetro.com.au





More information about the Link mailing list