"For about 40 years, climate scientists have used computer models to predict what global warming will look like with dead-on accuracy, said climate computer modeler Andrew Weaver of the University of Victoria in British Columbia"

"...will LOOK like..." ? "...with dead-on accuracy..." ?

If Weaver actually said that it may help his credibility in his rumored political bid, but not his scientific reputation.

If Nate Silver hopes to direct his attention to education, he should read Joseph Novak's "Learning, Creating and Using Knowledge". It seems to me that the problem of education is not so much that we don't know what the problems are, but rather that there is a widespread refusal to incorporate the findings of education research to our existing university systems. A hyper-focused attention cast to education -- as opposed to a more broad, interdisciplinary approach which leads to a fluency in how people mistakenly think about science -- will generally leave many questions unanswered. Education reform should concern itself with addressing problems with how people think. For science education, in particular, that demands that a person be willing to explore potential mistakes in scientific theory, and failures of our current communications to support the level of complexity required for authentic learning.

A great place to start out is with Novak's most recent work.

I respect this Republican.

http://www.youtub...e=fvwrel