perfidy

Predicting weather is a strong science in the 10 day window, with that being slowly pushed upwards by distributed supercomputing and better algorithms. It's being held back by the current stall in Moore's law, which may be with us for a little while.

Of course not all scientists say the same thing! But you have to look at the overall picture here, and do the tough thing -- place numbers on it. If only one out of every thousand scientists working in this area has a serious, contrary view supported by what they've written...

It's not about who's right and who's wrong, because science is what it is -- and nothing is certain. But we have to look at the probabilities involved here...and right now the probabilities are showing that climate change is happening and that the basis is human. The most recent report from a few months back significantly tightened up the causative network that underlies all the science.

So we have a river of probability running forward and the center path goes through very scary territory. At this point the science can't say _exactly_ what's happening, but the distribution curve on the likely events is fairly well known.

Engaging on this requires more than an assertion that there are contrary views. Bring them forward! The web is a beautiful thing. But watch out for the Heartland institute!