On 1 Des, 19:21, spop...@speedymail.org (Steve Pope) wrote:

> Don't buy it! *Don't let them control the debate.

Keep the politics out of this. For me, who wrote a
PhD thesis based on computational models representing
some physical system (albeit not related to meteorology),
the key statement in the article is:

"the failure of these [computational] models to account for
this natural internal variability [of the climatic system]."

In plain English: The climate models aren't good enough.
They will not be, until they are able to accurately
represent the variable factors like El Nino, on the scale
of decades, and the water cycle (evaperation -> percipetation)
on the day-to-day scale.

The argument has nothing to do with politics. It has to
do with scientific craftmanship. Computational models are
just that - models. There are no guarantees they have
any relation, whatsoever, with reality.

Rune