Isn't it funny that the same guys that cannot do reliable weather forecasts for TOMORROW, suggest that they can predict the climate in 10 years? The argument is that weather predictions and climate predictions are qualitatively different so that the former are more reliable in some way. Bullshit: climate prediction models hold precisely because they cannot be put to test in such a blunt way as weather models. It becomes a rethorical argument, more than anything else.

Isn't it funny that the same guys who can't compute reliable space-time coordinates for atoms in gasses nonetheless claim to be able to predict their macroscopic properties? The argument is that prediction of the macroscopic and microscopic properties of gasses are qualitatively different so that the the former are more reliable in some way. Bullshit: Gas-phase thermodynamic models hold precisely because they cannot be put to test in such a blunt way as microscopic models of the behaviours of gasses. It becomes a rhetorical argument, more than anything else.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.