Quote:
Originally Posted by redpoint5
I think a similar problem was encountered when putting together the Bible. At some point, it was considered complete. Then Joseph Smith decided it was incomplete, so released the Book of Mormon.
My point is, ultimately you have people making their subjective decision of what to include and what to exclude.
The usefulness of the climate bible will only be apparent if predictions come to pass.
|
I would mention that,unlike faith-based worldviews,which cannot be tested,Climate science is something which can be reduced to numerical models, run backwards and forwards with degrees of certainty,and are open to to independent verification.
I don't have,nor will have access to IPCC committee members(if that's how they operate),so I can't really bring anything useful to that discussion.
What you might consider,is the fact that,with the state-of-the art in modelling as it is,actual observed processes are exceeding predictions,which may suggest 'abrupt' climate change,which if true,then we'd have no way to adapt to it,as with the Younger-Dryas.
We know that Earth is capable of abrupt climate change.It's happened before.Do you want to invite that to the dance?