re: #418 buzzsawmonkey

If it’s hotter, the atmosphere will absorb more water—which means that it will accept some of the water from the “rising sea levels.” And it also means that there will be more water vapor that can become rain.

Which is why all of the really hot deserts have so much rain… You are just wrong on this. The climate is vastly more complicated than this.

If the technological solutions will all either be inadequate or will increase the problem, if the only thing we can do is go back to living on subsistence farms or something—oh, but no, we can’t do that, because there’s not enough arable land and without all the technological stuff which supposedly caused these conditions in the first place, we can’t get enough food to feed the people we’ve got—then the hell with it. Go ahead and start the massacre, or whatever—or impose the top-to-bottom rationing that so many people are clearly itching to inflict on everyone except themselves. But don’t be surprised if there’s a little pushback.

The technological solutions, nuclear, wind, solar, are quite workable and would actually stimulate our economy to deploy, while staunching the flow of billions ot countries to hate us. It is a win win win.

Or, scale back the f*cking hubris and recognize that your models are lovely, but that models are still just models. I don’t care how many peer reviewers in the echo chamber nod like a row of bobbleheads in unison; I’d rather scrabble for radishes in the drought-caked earth than live under a bunch of politicians in cahoots with a secular science priesthood.

Buzzy, on what great scientific expertise do you rest these assertions?

“It is just a model” is the anti-AGW equivalent of “it’s just a theory.”

You are only saying that you refuse to look at the models themselves, because you refuse to believe in the math that went into them. If you look at the page I linked to, you will see the models matching the observed data.

Then you will see where the models are heading.