[LINK] Scientists offered cash to dispute climate study

[Glen Turner]

Bernard Robertson-Dunn wrote:

> 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.

[ One of the nice things about my job is that I chat with
  a lot of real scientists.  Here's how the people at NCAR
  described to to me. ]

No model of climate change itself can be accurate. We simply
don't understand the failure modes of some components. To
take a local example, we don't know what the failure mode
of the Southern Oscillation (El Nino) is. If factors change
to alter the oscillating model we don't know what the new
model will be. It could plunge Australia into permanent
drought, or not. We don't know.

The IPCC models are conservative -- they assume that no
systems fail, but keep working as they have been under
the altered conditions. No scientist seriously expects
that to be the case -- the changes are too large -- and
in that sense the IPCC model is bogus.

But the IPCC model is the best we have, since we simply
don't know enough to say which will be the first system
to fail.

The obvious best way forward is to be guided by the
precautionary principle. Equally obviously, that is going
to alter the economy and people's lives in unimaginable
ways. The greatest effect of this should fall upon the
rich and powerful, since they are the greatest generators
of greenhouse gasses. Again obviously, the rich and powerful
can (try to) use their wealth and power to make the burden
fall elsewhere (eg, China and India).