Computer modeling impose a quasi perfect climate understanding.

The quality conclusion of digital model prediction is very far from to be demonstrated.

To be able to compute correctly the climate evolution, we must first develop a quasi perfect understanding of the numerous involved phenomena with their direction, intensity and interaction. It is very far from to be the current situation in climate sciences.
The joined image is only a weak illustration of the deep complexity of the issue to be solved for a credible computer modeling prediction.

Today:
Scientists are at the very beginning of the actual knowledge of the great diversity of climatic parameters in complex interactions which decide for regional and global climate.
Mathematical modeling can consequently produce, at best, only a rough approximation but generally wrong conclusions.

Today digital models are highly speculative and provide as a conclusion what the operator wants to say.

Those who claim to be able to rely on a climate digital model are obviously resumptuous gays but not scientists.

Is IPCC caerfull?
In the 2007 report it resumes as a leitmotif the wording "likely" when important conclusion are necessary. They make a comeback at the ancient Greeks times who insufficient knowledge was available and they said "we save the appearances" with plausible reasoning but irrelevant to the real knowledge.

Continue