It looks at the present armadillo migrations as a possible analog of the past, and says
nothing about future climate trajectory.
Not exact matches
In summary, there is little new
about climate science in the report, and
nothing at all new
about attribution of past warming and extreme weather events to human activity, projections of
future warming and its effects, or potential for catastrophic changes.
Based on
nothing more than dubious computer models, these people pretend to know what the
future holds (
climate change of such magnitude that it's worth worrying
about).
Hence, these models have virtually
nothing to say
about future climate.
In as much as none of the model scenarios can be validated, all predictions
about future climate conditions amount to
nothing more that, «Wait to see if our predictions come true; you'll see then.
And if Don is right
about climate models, and I think he has a major point, then we know
nothing whatsoever
about what is going to happen to
climate in the
future.
Of the myriad of claims made in the
climate debate, Cox thinks it is sufficient to answer even the IPCC's own statement that «Uncertainties
about future vulnerability, exposure, and responses of interlinked human and natural systems are large» with the mantra, «
climate change is happening», which means precisely
nothing.
Climate models which have not, and can not be validated, tell us absolutely nothing about what might happen to our climate in the
Climate models which have not, and can not be validated, tell us absolutely
nothing about what might happen to our
climate in the
climate in the
future.
It says
nothing about a legally - binding treaty in the
future, an aspect considered essential if a global
climate deal is to be effective.