Who mentioned conclusions? Not I unless I wrote in in the white spaces between the words…..and that confirms your delusionality which cohenite has pointed out.

http://www.co2science.org/articles/V12/N1/EDIT.php

http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=3354

Your dismissal of the Watts link showing the Santa Rosa data before and after GISS gets its hands on it is facile and deserving of no respect at all; look at the graphs from NASA which are in blue and red; this consistent pattern of up-adjusting is mirrored at numerous locations and sites over the US; in addition the GISS record has been shown to have manipulated the whole US record to remove the fact the 1930s were hotter than any other period including post 2000; this sustained and repeated behaviour, which BoM is guilty of also, is indicative of either a peristent ignorance or a deliberate intent; it means that GISS and BoM etc are worthless in this debate; one further illustration of the uselessness of the models;

http://www.warwickhughes.com/hoyt/scorecard.htm

sorry, but you don t understand logic at all. so you shouldn t claim logical fallacies.

the part of my post that you quoted, does NOT include a conclusion. so it cant include a false conclusion either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur_(logic)

i took a look at the presentation that i linked above. basically he is contradicting a claim, that nobody makes. a global temperature model can do VERY WELL; even if it gets the summer temperature for Paris in 2020 completely wrong…

A ‘precise’ regional comparison between the models and a designated part of Earth is dealt with in this study;

http://www.scribd.com/doc/904914/A-comparison-of-tropical-temperature-trends-with-model-predictions?page=6

this study at least is looking at a reasonable thing. i look at the graph on page 5, and i am still astonished at how good the models are.
there are good explanations for the discrepancies out there. but the models are sound.

But really the lies and scams of Hansen and his temp ‘adjustments’ really means that any comparison highlighting the fallacy of the models is superflous beause Hansen simply manipulates data to achieve the desired result; eg;

This is just plain fraud and you are defending it.

if you can proof fraud, please do so.
from my look at the picture, somebody parked a trailer next to the sensor. he shouldn t have done that. this will have no significant impact on the TREND of temperature, that will be measured.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/904914/A-comparison-of-tropical-temperature-trends-with-model-predictions?page=6

But really the lies and scams of Hansen and his temp ‘adjustments’ really means that any comparison highlighting the fallacy of the models is superflous beause Hansen simply manipulates data to achieve the desired result; eg;

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/12/08/how-not-to-measure-temperature-part-79-would-you-could-you-with-a-boat/#more-4455

This is just plain fraud and you are defending it.

Non sequitur.

Cohers – but your gravatar seems to totally lack soul and content – does this reflect it’s owner.

Jen said my Courtney Love gravatar was disingenuous, so I thought the creep theme worked better. But surely I can be Courtney if I wanted to? Would you take my case?

And yes – Koutsoyiannis – well interesting stuff but I wouldn’t expect GCMs to check out at this level of scale. Poor test. So interesting but ho hum.

Hey did you see the neat ongoing educational series by RC – http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/01/faq-on-climate-models-part-ii/langswitch_lang/ja

and I haven’t posted an RC link for months – Ian Castles ticked me off last time …

http://www.itia.ntua.gr/getfile/850/3/documents/2008EGU_ClimatePredictionPrSm_.pdf

cohenite, your use of scientific terms sometimes gets even me confused. so occasionally i really believe that you know, what you are talking about.

the paper you cite in this case, is comparing the results of a GLOBAL climate model to a LOCAL development.

http://www.itia.ntua.gr/getfile/850/3/documents/2008EGU_ClimatePredictionPrSm_.pdf

now if you find a single scientist, who believes that the global models will do well in tracking the temperature records of Albany (USA), drop me a line. the paper is complete rubbish.

(when i said “regional”, i was talking more about something approaching the size of a HEMISPHERE. as i mentioned as well…)