The Profound Junk Science of Climate

[R Kym Horsell]

Climate change prophecy hangs its hat on computer climate models. The
models have gigantic problems. According to Kevin Trenberth, once in
charge of modeling at the National Center for Atmospheric Research,

...

LOL.

I like the way Exxon's own climate models in the early 1980s predicted
today's global temperatures better than the disinformers they later paid
to confuse the public about the science:


Dana Nuccitelli @dana1981 19 Jun 2019 15:17Z
Exclusively @skepticscience, I compare Exxon's 1982 global warming
predictions to those from think tankers it later quietly funded. Here's the
money shot #ExxonKnew
skepticalscience.com/1982-exxon-acc# <https://t.co/p3cdm83UH6>
[Exxon 1982 & NASA data vs Lindzen '89 & Michaels '99:]
<pic.twitter.com/M1Ii1dmz3D>


Google scholar says there are 23,500 cites to the Exxon model(s).
There's also a wikipedia page with some background and a bib.

[Bob Casanova]

On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 10:50:07 -0000 (UTC), the following
appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by R Kym Horsell

Climate change prophecy hangs its hat on computer climate models. The
models have gigantic problems. According to Kevin Trenberth, once in
charge of modeling at the National Center for Atmospheric Research,

...
LOL.

<snip>

All of this is off-topic in sci.skeptic. Unless, of course,
it's somehow about a claim of paranormal ability on
someone's part? No? Then please take it to an appropriate
group; I'm sure there are sci groups dedicated to
climatology.