For me, the most interesting point is if the theoretical scientific framework. I don't know nothing about climate change. But I know about other computational simulation frameworks: namely conservation genetics, population genetics and spread of malaria drug resistance.
I owe the European Tribune a long post explaining my views, but for now I would say: trust this theoretical "science" at your own peril. Of course, more empirical evidence (of the type "there was always ice on place X but not anymore", falls in a different category, and is probably more trustworthy. Of all forms of caution, caution in love is perhaps the most fatal to true happiness - Bertrand Russell
more empirical evidence (of the type "there was always ice on place X but not anymore", falls in a different category, and is probably more trustworthy.
That's pretty much what I've been pushing here the past years: data, data, data.
Hope to see your post soon...