What's wrong with that, Lizzie, is that the scientific community are sponsored by a lot of different, self-interested parties and, therefore, cannot be trusted to be impartial.
Very few will come into that category as the majority of scientists do not want to know about politics and such like; they just want to study and learn from what they research. Anyway, even if some are biased, they are not all that way inclined by any stretch of the imagination and love to operate beyond "establishment" control. That is why if the vast majority state there is Global Warming taking place, then there is Global Warming taking place.
Are you and me anywhere near qualified enough to be credible critics of that community?
We only have opinions, gut feelings, with no empirical evidence and are in fact biased ourselves being ignorant of the true facts. 
Sorry, Lizzie you are using the same arguments as these pseudo scientists to try justify what is clearly not working or it would have predicted that last 15 years of static temperature rises. They cannot model future climate and even struggle to model the past and even then their modeling only works for part of less than the blink of an eye compared to the age of the earth where it covers 1880 (the end of the last mini cold period) to 1998. There sample length has no more meaning than an alien being beamed into London for 1 second and then Sydney for 1 second and coming to the conclusion that London always has sunlight and the river must form a crucial part in cooling to keep it habitable and the reverse in Sydney where it is always in darkness, this is the resolution they are running at.
It is impossible to model future climate change for the very simple reason that it is a chaotic dynamic system. We don't know and can't know what the unknown, unknowns are, so any long term modelling is a nonsense. On top of that many of the fundamental influences of our climate are not well understood and that includes the major ones like sun activity and cycles, solar wind changes, the variances in our distance from the sun, earth axis wobbling and changes in magnetic poles etc, etc. Add to this volcanic activity and earthquakes which are random events along with many other unknown factors.
Another dynamic system that has certainly shown the failings of such systems since 2007 has been economic modelling, where the IMF, OBR and BOE economic models for predicting economic growth have been appalling where their models can't and don't work in chaotic times only in near steady state ones, as in the growth this year will be a bit more or a bit less than last year. The flap of the butterfly's wing was the point when banks collectively realised the AAA debts they had been sold was actually sub-prime. Now I have no doubt that a rough model of what has happened in the past could be created, because unknown, unknowns are now known unknowns, but modelling the past is no prediction on what will happen in the future, where we are back to unknown, unknowns again.
Do humans affect the climate, yes along with polar bears, coral reefs, volcanos, earthquakes, the sun and all other objects that form the dynamic systems in our solar system and on earth, can we model all of this to measure such small changes, no chance.
Long term analysis of ice core shows that the current variance of our climate is well within normal fluctuations in this current 1.6 million year old ice age.
Unfortunately, where the pro-climate change scientist are not prepared to allow their models to be judged by a broad range scientific peers (I wonder why
) they instead just fall back to the argument that we are right so believe us, a bit like a local priest when talking about god. That is the problem when something becomes a religion, it is all based on hearsay not proven and provable facts.
Sorry, but as a scientist I was always taught to question and question again and never believe until it can be proven with certainty and this pseudo climate science falls woefully short of this threshold.
Author
Topic: Warning snake oil peddlers at work again! (Read 2564 times)