New Antarctic sea-ice record

[TexasDevilDog]

Models are not science. They are glorified guesses. There are the sole vehicle used to procure funding for science with little to no current evidence.

Models are science. As I stated above, models are an imperfect representation of a relationship. A simple electrical model relationship for a resistor is R=E/I, where E is voltage and I is current. But resistors vary over temperature, some perhaps over pressure and humidity, but the model has no variables for temperature, pressure or humidity. It is not prefect. The function might not even be valid with very high voltage or very high current, where the resistor heats up excessively.

[exlude]

Models are not science. They are glorified guesses. There are the sole vehicle used to procure funding for science with little to no current evidence.

Uh, models are employed in attempts at scientific understanding all the time. Your comment kind of scarily edges on "theories are just guesses". In fact, models are just attempts to apply current theories to actual situations.

[CJ]

National Geographic is not a peer reviewed journal. They, along with major news outlets, sell headlines. It's rare to see as universal concurrence in science as you do in popular science.

That's just one of the spreads. Thousands of scientists and recognized science journals posted the same things. How quickly we forget I suppose. It's the same bag of shit, just sold in a different manner.

[exlude]

Their relevancy is in how thousands of scientists can get it wrong, and have, frequently. I always mention that, because when national geographic and many other publications ran their spreads on projected global cooling, global famine, etc. they were cramming it down the throats of Americans. And they were dead fucking wrong.

National Geographic is not a peer reviewed journal. They, along with major news outlets, sell headlines. It's rare to see as universal concurrence in science as you do in popular science.

[CJ]

If that's all you want to take away from it, okay. The data still exists, however, and must be explainable in modern models.

Models are not science. They are glorified guesses. There are the sole vehicle used to procure funding for science with little to no current evidence.

[TexasDevilDog]

People need to stop taking single studies as the final word on anything. Thousands of studies come together to form an overarching picture. But most people get their "understanding" from news blurbs, sometimes posted in political forums and are only looking for vindication.

Agreed, the problem is that many people have short memories and only think of their recent experiences. A bigger problem is people are trying to draw direct linear relationships to weather and climate events.

I have learned from my science and engineering education that, there is no phenomenon in the universe that can be modeled with a simple linear function. We use simple linear functions to explain cause and effect relationship because they are easy to understand. These functions turn out to be the least imperfect representation of the relationship but they tend to have errors. To minimize these errors, functions are only valid in a defined domain.

Example: Kepler's laws of planetary motion works for all the planets but fails for stars at a galactic scale and also on the atomic level.

[exlude]

their relevancy is in how thousands of scientists can get it wrong, and have, frequently.

If that's all you want to take away from it, okay. The data still exists, however, and must be explainable in modern models.

[CJ]

Absolutely, and they remain relevant today in that big picture understanding I mentioned.

Their relevancy is in how thousands of scientists can get it wrong, and have, frequently. I always mention that, because when national geographic and many other publications ran their spreads on projected global cooling, global famine, etc. they were cramming it down the throats of Americans. And they were dead fucking wrong.

[exlude]

Thousands of studies proved global cooling in the 70's, just don't forget that.

Absolutely, and they remain relevant today in that big picture understanding I mentioned.

[CJ]

People need to stop taking single studies as the final word on anything. Thousands of studies come together to form an overarching picture. But most people get their "understanding" from news blurbs, sometimes posted in political forums and are only looking for vindication.

Thousands of studies proved global cooling in the 70's, just don't forget that.

[exlude]

Not really. Matching your intellect is quite simple actually.

Oh, another powerful insult. I wonder if you understand how little sense your green peace jab made.

[exlude]

The "debate is over" people need to let the scientists do their job with no threats. Blind acceptance of truth in science has slowed human progress throughout history. Sky falling warmists that stifle science by threatening a cut of funding for exploring other possibilities are just like religion zealots that demand all science be stopped.

People need to stop taking single studies as the final word on anything. Thousands of studies come together to form an overarching picture. But most people get their "understanding" from news blurbs, sometimes posted in political forums and are only looking for vindication.

[Trip McNeely]

Wow, really had to dig deep for that.

Not really. Matching your intellect is quite simple actually.

[TexasDevilDog]

The "debate is over" people need to let the scientists do their job with no threats. Blind acceptance of truth in science has slowed human progress throughout history. Sky falling warmists that stifle science by threatening a cut of funding for exploring other possibilities are just like religion zealots that demand all science be stopped.

[exlude]

lol, Go join Greenpeace then and tell us all how it is.

Wow, really had to dig deep for that.