I wrote the document at that link some twenty years ago. Not one single thing has changed since then to answer the objections I raised. And that includes twenty years of computer increases since then.
No model can be considered valid until its predictions have occurred. Nothing can change that. That is the Catch-22 of climate modelling.
It is never wise to hitch your cause to another cause as your fate follows the other.
All "pedias" are designed for a target audience of new parents which are in fact their primary market. The target level for the information is High School senior -- that being the last pre-college year for you strange Brits.;)
That said these things depend upon their objective. The volunteer editors, the cabal, have an objective of paralleling not surpassing and not differing from traditional encyclopedias.
I learned this by making a few changes based upon citations which I provided as part of the changes. Even though true they were too radical and the false but commonly believed information was preferred. My bad, anecdotal, but a fact.
Authored Comments
http://www.giwersworld.org/environment/aehb.phtml
I wrote the document at that link some twenty years ago. Not one single thing has changed since then to answer the objections I raised. And that includes twenty years of computer increases since then.
No model can be considered valid until its predictions have occurred. Nothing can change that. That is the Catch-22 of climate modelling.
It is never wise to hitch your cause to another cause as your fate follows the other.
All "pedias" are designed for a target audience of new parents which are in fact their primary market. The target level for the information is High School senior -- that being the last pre-college year for you strange Brits.;)
That said these things depend upon their objective. The volunteer editors, the cabal, have an objective of paralleling not surpassing and not differing from traditional encyclopedias.
I learned this by making a few changes based upon citations which I provided as part of the changes. Even though true they were too radical and the false but commonly believed information was preferred. My bad, anecdotal, but a fact.