I'm having difficulty quitting Scott Adams. Here is his latest.
He refers to a headline "Climate change computer model vindicated 30 years later...." Then he offers to bet a million bucks that he, Scott Adams, could do that. More specifically, "I can come up with a climate forecast model that ignores C02 and still predicts the temperature 30 years from now ...."
And he isn't going to. Aw shucks! A climate model that ignores
greenhouse gasses would be a scientific miracle. A revolution in
physics. Such revolutions have happened. Let's hear him out.
Scott Adams adds he is 100% confident he can do it, "using my current skill set." So that revolution in physics is in the bag already. Probably it is already in Scott Adams' head! And
we have testimony that Scott Adams has quite a smart head. Very persuasive testimony. From the source itself. So it is likely
But then, as so often happens, @SA
continues to write, and utterly
spoils the illusion. He doesn't propose to model anything. He proposes
to pull a bunch of numbers out of his butt and *call* it a model. Repeatedly.
And one of those numbers will turn out 30 years later to be true, so he wins his bet.
Get it? It is just like the old story about the investment-adviser scam. The guy who sends different stock predictions to a bunch of different people, then .... Scott Adams goes on to compliment his readers as being smart enough not to fall for that old scam.
So Adams equates physical modeling with pulling-numbers-out-of-your-butt, and a successful model is a scam. And he congratulates his readers for how smart they are for knowing about such scams.
One problem is that he his a pretty good storyteller.
Another problem is that it has lessened my taste for Dilbert cartoons. One of his best tropes is when a character uses logical-sounding rhetorical trickery to turn something on its head or put down another character. It is funny in a cartoon. it became less funny when I found out that Adams likes to practice these tricks in real life. And even less funny because he does it for the purpose of reinforcing climate denial.