Beyond "Climategeddon" - from science education to solutions

Again, you're lying. What I said is that one set of equations (paleoclimate equations) will dominate the model output prior to the Industrial Revolution, when CO₂ ranged between, if I recall correctly, 180ppm - 280ppm; and after the Industrial Revolution, as the CO₂ concentration increases to 390ppm, that will dominate the output of the model, just as these different forcing agents are dominant in their respective times, as their respective levels, in the real world. I didn't go into that detail, but I certainly have never given you any justification to assume and accuse me of "rigging" anything you little louse.

There are many reasons that a project can be "lousy science" and inaccuracy is just one of them. I suggested nothing inaccurate. I said it would be "lousy science" because it would not tell *scientists* anything they don't already know, which is the purpose of actual scientific research.

Communicating science to laypersons is not the job of scientists. It's the job of "journalists." It's just too bad there aren't any left in the "mainstream" corporate media who know science from a hole in the wall.
About Climate Change
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost