Electric Heatpumps.

Probably not Jon, but I detect something else. His ideas spring from very bad computer programming using arbitrary methods. Strangely this appears to be how all computer “people” now work, the amount of software in use that doesn't work properly is causing extreme damage to society. My own observation is that properly testing a piece of new code takes at least 10 times as long as designing and writing it. This is very boring and time-consuming, and so this step which is essential is now ignored in the development process. None of the supposed climate simulation programs have been tested as correct in any way, we have tons of real data for comparison with the simulations, yet none of them can reproduce the actual results with any degree of accuracy. The little ice age has been wiped out, the pauses and restarts of the last 100 years do not appear in any of the alleged model results. To then attempt to use such a “model” to forecast future climate is clearly stupid.

The most important point is that none of the models correctly mimics the strongest and most prevalent “greenhouse” gas, water vapour. Clouds are enormously significant, as is a shower dumping 1000's of tonnes of water on an area. This is dismissed a just “weather”, but the weather is the most significant factor in ground temperatures, as we feel ourselves every day. All of the “global warming” numbers come from tropospheric temperatures, but very little is understood on how these affect weather. If we knew accurately forecasting would be much more accurate, interestingly forecasts seem to have got worse over the last 10 - 20 years since the met office added “climate change” into the forecasting models!

Probably not Jon, but I detect something else. His ideas spring from very bad computer programming using arbitrary methods. Strangely this appears to be how all computer “people” now work, the amount of software in use that doesn't work properly is causing extreme damage to society. My own observation is that properly testing a piece of new code takes at least 10 times as long as designing and writing it. This is very boring and time-consuming, and so this step which is essential is now ignored in the development process. None of the supposed climate simulation programs have been tested as correct in any way, we have tons of real data for comparison with the simulations, yet none of them can reproduce the actual results with any degree of accuracy. The little ice age has been wiped out, the pauses and restarts of the last 100 years do not appear in any of the alleged model results. To then attempt to use such a “model” to forecast future climate is clearly stupid.

The most important point is that none of the models correctly mimics the strongest and most prevalent “greenhouse” gas, water vapour. Clouds are enormously significant, as is a shower dumping 1000's of tonnes of water on an area. This is dismissed a just “weather”, but the weather is the most significant factor in ground temperatures, as we feel ourselves every day. All of the “global warming” numbers come from tropospheric temperatures, but very little is understood on how these affect weather. If we knew accurately forecasting would be much more accurate, interestingly forecasts seem to have got worse over the last 10 - 20 years since the met office added “climate change” into the forecasting models!