Their claims are based on a chain of reasoning with multiple flaws:
(1) They claim that climate models cannot be relied upon but do not demonstrate this.
(2) They instead make a new climate model (despite this being in contradiction of (1)).
There isn't one climate model that works all of the time. Seems like a poor place to start the argument.
> Their claims are based on a chain of reasoning with multiple flaws:
(1) They claim that climate models cannot be relied upon but do not demonstrate this.
(2) They instead make a new climate model (despite this being in contradiction of (1)).
There isn't one climate model that works all of the time. Seems like a poor place to start the argument.
There isn't one climate model that works all of the time. Seems like a poor place to start the argument.