The consensus is that James failed to learn
anything about climate models from blog entries
like this one below. It so wrong, it's not
even an opener for debate. Should you, unlike
James and his fossil fool phonies, really
want to learn something about climate models,
actually running one is the best place to start.
Please go to:

http://edgcm.columbia.edu/


On May 8, 6:57*am, "James" wrote:
Scientific Consensus Is That Climate Models Have Failed Spectacularly -
What Did They Fail At and Why?
[ . . . ]

Peter Muehlbauer wrote:
Roger Coppock wrote:

The consensus is that James failed to learn
anything about climate models from blog entries
like this one below. It so wrong, it's not
even an opener for debate. Should you, unlike
James and his fossil fool phonies, really
want to learn something about climate models,
actually running one is the best place to start.
Please go to:

http://edgcm.columbia.edu/


On May 8, 6:57 am, "James" wrote:
Scientific Consensus Is That Climate Models Have Failed
Spectacularly - What Did They Fail At and Why?
[ . . . ]

The only thing I see is an idiot, posting an article here in a.g-w
without any reference or fullquote, truncated to 2 lines, breaking
the "pi's law" by writing the opponent's name into the subject line
for purpose of denunciation, and who is too dumb to change the
subject line in a correct way for newsreaders.

Hey petey, tell us again how climate scientists "should be shot down as of
this moment." lol