Share this comment
Don't know if this is the second posting , but ...
"<em>Pricing carbon makes good sense ... </em>
<a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feart.2019.00223/full/">No it doesn't</a>.
Climate models have no predictive value, Roger. There is no valid evidence human CO2 emissions are increasing, will increase, or even can increase …
Don't know if this is the second posting , but ...
"<em>Pricing carbon makes good sense ... </em>
<a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feart.2019.00223/full/">No it doesn't</a>.
Climate models have no predictive value, Roger. There is no valid evidence human CO2 emissions are increasing, will increase, or even can increase air temperature.
If Roger Sr. says otherwise, he's wrong.
Not wanting to be disrespectful, but my two reviewers are the only climate scientists I've encountered who understand physical error analysis.
All the others -- more than 2 dozen, mostly climate modelers -- were utterly ignorant of it. That's a demonstrable fact. These people are untrained and unable to evaluate the reliability of their own models.
The whole of CO2 alarmism is nonsensical. See, <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abstract/10.1260/0958-305X.26.3.391/">Negligence, Non-Science and Consensus Climatology</a>.
I know it takes courage, Roger, but someone has to speak up strongly. Everyone in a position to do something, to whom I've written, has responded with silence.