Exxon-Mobil Admits Global Warming Is Real

[ECSNorway]

An example of alleged scientific error in "global warming" punditry:

---

Well, my PhD is in atmospheric spectroscopy. My dissertation was about the effects of modeling errors on measurements of infrared absorption parameters.
The global warming models have some disturbing characteristics. For example, their output doesn't depend on their inputs. A few years ago, it was found that the value for sunlight absorbed by clouds was off by 600%. No visible change.
It was found that, due to a transcription error, the value for IR flux from water vapor was off by an amount equal to the increased IR flux from doubling CO2. Nada. How does that work? An error, equal in size to the whole effect that you're studying, does nothing, but the effect destroys the world?
This isn't even "Garbage In, Garbage Out." This is "Anything In, Same Old Garbage Out."
And that's only one problem.

---

I've sent to ask for confirmation and evidentiary support of his assertions, but it continues to underline my question of the scientific validity of the "global warming" concept.--
"I give you the beautiful... the talented... the tirelessly atomic-powered...
R!
DOROTHY!
WAYNERIGHT!
--
Sucrose Octanitrate.
Proof positive that with sufficient motivation, you can make anything explode.