«Natural Revelation» is a theological ploy, not
an accurate model of reality.
Not exact matches
We do not know if the universe is or is not designed, but we do know that the best way to understand the «design»
of the universe is to study it unbiasedly and make the most
accurate models that fit
reality in the most precise ways that cause the best predictions — in a word, science.
Model results are never represented as an unerringly
accurate portrait
of reality, although if you quote Hansen as claiming they are, I will retract that assertion.
Evolution has through these two facts produced a material
reality that is so fantastically complex, random and unpredictable that it can never be
modeled except in the crudest way — the only
accurate model of the world is itself.
Please do point me to the definitive correlation
of predictions made by your fabulously
accurate atmospheric
models to the actual
reality measured over the past 20 years.
For a
model to be
accurate it has to at least give the semblance
of mimicking
reality.
The
models have become
accurate enough that they've been used for regional predictions
of atmospheric temperatures, and those predictions have all been shown to need ACO2 in order for the
models to match
reality (See Figure 9.12, IPCC AR4 WG1 Chapter 9, page 695).
A more
accurate model is: politics is a system that 1) selects against skills needed for rigorous thinking and for qualities such as groupthink and confirmation bias, 2) incentivises a badly selected set
of people to consider their career not the public interest, 3) drops them into dysfunctional institutions with no relevant training and poor tools, 4) centralises vast amounts
of power in the hands
of these people and institutions in ways we know are bound to cause huge errors, and 5) provides very weak (and often damaging) feedback so facing
reality is rare, learning is practically impossible, and system reform is seen as a hostile act by political parties and civil services worldwide.