[Azred]

Originally Posted by Micah Foehammer Much has been made of the IPCC "models" and their inaccuracy. What IPCC actually presented were a range of "projections" based on socio-economic models tied to future fossil fuel usage, population growth and other factors. They weren't intended to be predictions of actual temperature changes, but rather to illustrate the range of possibilities. From IPCC's own website: Climate projections are distinguished from climate predictions in order to emphasize that climate projections depend upon the emission/concentration/radiative forcing scenario used, which are based on assumptions, concerning, for example, future socio-economic and technological developments that may or may not be realized, and are therefore subject to substantial uncertainty.

So everything they do can be distilled down to assumptions. What was that old saying about what happens when you assume?

If they are putting out possibilities based on assumptions then two things immediately become clear: 1) quit basing things on assumptions and 2) they are wasting time and money by extrapolating possibilities that they admit might be inaccurate.

In short, the IPCC is telling us that we may ignore their findings due to the inherent uncertainty.

As I noted to you elsewhere, my struggle is against faulty science that begins with a presumption (human beings are disrupting the climate) and then looks for data to fit the presumption.