Quote:
Originally Posted by RustyLugNut
I do volunteer tutoring for undergrad students at several of the local universities. I get to rub shoulders with climate students and their professors. They seem less sure of the media proposed climate disasters. They are willing to debate the points and take notes. They admit that "modern climatology" is in it's infancy. And they readily admit their studies are skewed towards pro-AGW since there are no grants to be had to do no-AGW studies. They do admit that current climate models are just that - models.
If professors and their underlings say as much, what is the basis for your authority to denigrate someones informative post?
|
Saw your comment and wanted to butt in.
I'm uncertain that in an undergrad curriculum,that the students would even have enough statistical tools underneath them,to even understand the level of multivariate statistical techniques embodied in the numerical climate models.I just finished a fairly recent college textbook in statistics,and it doesn't even scratch the surface of what grad students and post-docs would be using.And it's the mathematics department who'd be building the models,alongside the field scientists.
And even if their professor had the training,I don't think they'd be introducing certain materials to the students until they were in grad school.
Climate models use a lot of differential equations not even mentioned in undergraduate statistics.
The models have accurately predicted global warming since the late 1990s.I don't know what the controversy would be.