The failure of 95% of climate models has made the IPCC 95% certain that the models are correct.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- High Speed Analysis And Visualization
- El Nino To The Rescue?
- Fake News Update
- Growth Of Antarctic Sea Ice
- 65 Years Of Progress!
- El Nino To The Rescue?
- Worst March Drought On Record
- ChartGL Process Control Demo
- The Biggest Money Laundering Scam
- Drought In The Headwaters Of Lake Powell
- Unrealistic Expectations Of Water Availability
- Did Bill Gates Do This?
- Worst March Drought On Record In The US
- The Real Hockey Stick Graph
- Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Gaslighting 1924
- “Why Do You Resist?”
- Climate Attribution Model
- Fact Checking NASA
- Fact Checking Grok
- Fact Checking The New York Times
- New Visitech Features
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
- Analyzing Big City Crime (Part 2)
Recent Comments
- conrad ziefle on High Speed Analysis And Visualization
- Bob G on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Bob G on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Gordon Vigurs on 65 Years Of Progress!
- arn on 65 Years Of Progress!
- arn on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Bob G on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Bob G on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Jack the Insider on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Bob G on 65 Years Of Progress!
95% is the closest number divisible by 5 to 97% that is the psychological maximum of credulity.
They need to find another 0.4 degrees of cooling of the past to push current “departure from average” into the mid range of the models. I’d be on the lookout for a recut of historic (1983 – 1998) temperatures once again. Excuse will be “old data was incorrectly tabulated”.
Reblogged this on CACA.
I am guessing they have not revealed the forcing assumptions of the three models that are on track.
Must be working, we’re not warming… ROFL…
Just think of the “constructive” things that money could do….
The only place there’s a “fit”….is where they hindcast
Learning from their mistakes? Or something….