Bill Cook's bill brings some sanity to the climate change debate

...This issue was the essence of the debate last week on HB 819 , a bill cosponsored by Rep. Bill Cook of Beaufort County. The bill essentially prohibits the Coastal Resources Commission from basing its policy decision on predictions made by "climate change models" which necessarily try to predict the cycles in climate change.

Democrats in the Legislature and sycophants in the Elite Media, being unable to refute the science behind the bill, resorted to ridicule.

Lead them not into temptation | Digging in the Clay

Climatologist; I have a system of undetermined complexity and undetermined composition, floating and spinning in space. It has a few internal but steady state and minor energy sources. An external energy source radiates 1365 watts per meter squared at it on a constant basis. What will happen? 

Physicist; The system will arrive at a steady state temperature which radiates heat to space that equals the total of the energy inputs. Complexity of the system being unknown, and the body spinning in space versus the radiated energy source, there will be cyclic variations in temperature, but the long term average will not change.

Climatologist; Well what if I change the composition of the system?

Physicist; see above.

Ten Things I Learned in the Climate Lab | Planet3.0

Scientists do not blindly trust their own models of global warming. In fact, nobody is more aware of a model’s specific weaknesses than the developers themselves. Most of our time is spent comparing model output to observations, searching for discrepancies, and hunting down bugs.

...

Climate models are fabulous experimental subjects. If you run the UVic model twice with the same code, data, options, and initial state, you get exactly the same results. (I’m not sure if this holds for more complex GCMs which include elements of random weather variation.) For this reason, if you change one factor, you can be sure that the model is reacting only to that factor. Control runs are completely free of external influences, and deconstructing confounding variables is only a matter of CPU time. Most experimental scientists don’t have this element of perfection in their subjects – it makes me feel very lucky.