“If the models are as flawed as critics say … you have to ask yourself, ‘How come they work?’”
– Gavin Schmidt [NASA], quoted in David Fahrenhold, “Scientists’ Use of Computer Models to Predict Climate Change is Under Attack,” Washington Post, April 6, 2010.
“[Model results] could also be sociological: getting the socially acceptable answer.”
– Gerald North (Texas A&M) to Rob Bradley (Enron), June 20, 1998.
The above quotation by NASA climate scientist Gavin Schmidt suggests that quite remarkable progress has been made with climate models in recent years. Such must be the case given the verdict by leading climate scientists that climate models were not nearly ready for prime time just a decade ago.
But what do climate scientists really believe behind closed doors? Will they no longer express their innermost thoughts in emails or in fear that ‘the cause’ of climate alarm/forced energy transformation will be compromised?…
[The other parts of this series on the activism of Texas A&M climatologists are here: Part I, Part II, and Part III]
“If the models are as flawed as critics say … you have to ask yourself, ‘How come they work?'”
– Gavin Schmidt [NASA], quoted in David Fahrenhold, “Scientists’ Use of Computer Models to Predict Climate Change is Under Attack,” Washington Post, April 6, 2010.
“We do not know much about modeling climate. It is as though we are modeling a human being. Models are in position at last to tell us the creature has two arms and two legs, but we are being asked to cure cancer.”
– Gerald North (Texas A&M) to Rob Bradley (Enron), November 12, 1999
A Washington Post piece last week, “Scientists’ use of computer models to predict climate change is under attack,” has brought attention to the importance of climate modeling in the current debate over climate sensitivity to greenhouse gases (GHGs).…