"Ferocious" is hardly the right word. I was trained as an engineer. We use models all the time, but only in well-characterized problem domains where careful experimental evidence validates them. Climate doesn't meet either condition.
The Feynman quote which applies here is "no matter how pretty it is, no matter who said it, if doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong." The models are not able to replicate the results from two significant experimental datasets: satellite global temperatures and radiosonde weather balloons. Their history is not long, but long enough to be convincing to me. So yes, the more extreme upper end of the climate model outputs is just silly at this point.
"Ferocious" is hardly the right word. I was trained as an engineer. We use models all the time, but only in well-characterized problem domains where careful experimental evidence validates them. Climate doesn't meet either condition.
The Feynman quote which applies here is "no matter how pretty it is, no matter who said it, if doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong." The models are not able to replicate the results from two significant experimental datasets: satellite global temperatures and radiosonde weather balloons. Their history is not long, but long enough to be convincing to me. So yes, the more extreme upper end of the climate model outputs is just silly at this point.