"The data does not matter... We're not basing our recommendations on the data; we're basing them on the climate models."
- Professor Chris K. Folland; former IPCC lead author, UK Met Office Head of Climate Variability, later Climate Variability and Forecasting, and a modeling expert.
The scientific climate fraud is:
- Proof we are right rests on our expertise: that we are better scientists than our critics.
- We know so much about climate that we can write it as a computer program.
- Our climate programs can then predict missing data for temperatures
- This (above) explains why we're so emphatic that you agree on our predictions:
"you must believe in climate change" - we say. When you agree with us (them), then you condone our status as experts - which is why we have jobs as climate scientists in the first place. Our expert staus then enables us to make up reality to suit our bias, assumptions, and ideology.
Ultimately, everything rests on this basic greenhouse gas model Folland believed in. It is an incompetent model. It only survived because though police censor better models - such a Uli Weber's video | document | Uli Weber (German/web) | Uli Weber (German/pdf) | Lunar Diviner Experiment
Any sufficiently crappy research is indistinguishable from fraud -- Andrew Gelman
"Scientific" ideology which enables this pseudoscience became so widespread that it took over physics.
