Alastair wrote:
> Can I just point out that if the current models are correct then it
> might be implausible but it could just prove that my model is correct!
>
>
> But I have given up arguing with sceptics. It is a waste of time. The
> same seems true of you lot :-( Your minds seem to be as closed as
> theirs. It the facts don't suit you they are implausible!
>
> Cheers, Alastair.
Alastair,
If you really have a "model", you should write up your findings and
publish them. Otherwise, for all we know, you are just blowing
smoke. Mental models are fun to think about, but, in the case of the
atmospheric energy balance, they are not going to cut it. For
example, does your model reproduce the measured lapse rate in the
atmosphere? Does your model reproduce the known seasonal cycle? Does
it give a good representation of rainfall distribution? Show us the
data. Time to fish or cut bait.
E. S.
---
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated
venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of
global environmental change.
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the
submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not
gratuitously rude.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
