“Response to Dr. Meier’s answer #9 – coin flips in the context of climate modeling“. Steven Goddard finds fault with Dr. Walt Meier’s example of coin flipping as an analogy for long-term prediction.

We know that weather models are very accurate for about three days, and then quickly break down due to chaos. There is little reason to believe that climate models will do any better through successive iterations.

His proof? Some seasonal weather predictions that weren’t as accurate as he thinks they should be. Nice try. Steven still feels smugly comfortable concluding thus:

I don’t see much theoretical or empirical evidence that climate models produce meaningful information about the climate in 100 years.

Maybe Steven should open his eyes a bit more. Skeptical Science talks about the success of climate models a bit here.