![Guide to the different ways people deny science and scientific consensus. [960x960 - 78KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/Fd5wG1.jpg){kind=link}
Climate models, epidemiological models, power much any model of a complex system over a significant time frame.
Particularly where the complexities of the systems require more detailed analysis than is possible or practical. Resulting in non- physical modelling (i.e. "tuned" parameters and made up factors used in place of the actual phenomena, such as thunderstorms in climate models).
Oh ok I see what you mean now. I agree modeling is a good tool to have some projective ideas checked but should not be touted as gospel or infallible.
It sort of fits in under experts, but you also have to throw all data modeling in there. If it isn't done correctly, your math, your data input, your method of gathering data, output parameters, and so on can all skew a result.
Not to mention certain lines of scientific inquiry just aren't allowed anymore.
(post is archived)