Only in America can such a ludicrous idea be accepted. Fifty years ago – maybe – the polar bear might have been seriously in danger. Since then it has quadrupled its population, mainly due to hunting restrictions.
But in America, where people are more comfortable with SONY PlayStation than with demonstrable facts, computer models dictate reality to government policy makers. What is worse is that these models have never been shown to be able to predict global temperature.
I practice science and occasionally use models, but I don’t believe that models are an accurate representation of reality. A model only tells you what you the modelers THINK is real – not what IS real.
A climate model is a simplified version of the world, where mathematical relationships between physical properties are calculated by computers. Since the real world is a lot more complex and has a lot more relationships than any computer can reasonably calculate in a practical time-frame, assumptions replace many of the real world’s complex interactions.
Until very recently, no climate models factored in some of the real worlds most important climate drivers. The known variability of oceanic circulation and its effects on regional and global temperatures.
When only one of the three major oceanic circulation patterns (the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation) was recently added to one of the IPCC models we were told that a cooling change in the circulation pattern would delay the original model’s predicted rise in temperature by 10 or 20 years.
I wonder what we will find out when the other major oceanic circulation cycles are added. Will this have any impact on north polar ice? Will the the government regulators busy dismantling our economy to protect polar bear habitat notice?