|Unidentified CO2 Science staff member|
...there will be no way to know the climatic significance of either past or projected increases in the air's CO2 content via the use of climate models.So surely someone's head at CO2 Science must have exploded from the pressure of this cognitive dissonance. I wonder whose it was.
Another of their learned tomes on the subject is titled "A Fundamental Failure of Current Climate Models." And here was their summary of a paper whose expressed purpose was to distinguish between natural and manmade impacts on surface temperature:
Because of what their analysis revealed, the two researchers concluded that "climate models may therefore lack -- or incorrectly parameterize -- fundamental processes by which surface temperatures respond to radiative forcings," which is a conclusion with which all of the world's "climate skeptics" would probably agree....Naturally Anthony Watts considered CO2 Science's latest conclusion perfectly sound and worthy of being rerun on his blog. The inside of his head is a vacuum (that comes straight from observations, with no models involved), so there was no danger of another explosion.