- Climate “science” is a “model” based science, its entire credibility is dependent upon the accuracy of its computer models. The very precise climate models are very inaccurate.
- The confidence of the climate science “consensus” increased as the climate models increasingly deviated from observations.
- 100% of IPCC Climate Models overestimated the expected increase in global temperatures, 100%. A 100% overestimation rate involving this many models represents a systemic bias, not a random error.
- The climate models assume a linear relationship between CO2 and temperature. That relationship does not exist.
- Real science relies on the scientific method, and reaches a conclusion through falcification (rejecting the null), experimentation, data collection, data analysis and reproduciblity. Climate “science” relies on none of the classical scientific practices, and relies on computer models, peer review and consensus.
- The extreme failure of the IPCC Climate Models to accurately model global temperatures means that the IPCC Modelers failed to include significant variables, failed to properly model CO2 or both. Regardless of which is true, the IPCC has failed to make the case that CO2 is the cause of the recent warming.
- If climate “science” was a “settled science,” the climate models would be able to accurately predict the climate. They don’t even come close.