The name is called the RCP 8.5. So I think that means that there are a bunch of different scenarios. You know if this and that happen it looks like this but if this and that happen it looks like this. So this is one of those but it's the most extreme one and the one that literally nobody thinks is real. So the AP wrote a story based on a climate model that even the climate scientists say what you're using that model? Nobody thinks that model is real. Why do they think it's not real? Because it assumes an improbable future of runaway coal consumption, stalled technological progress, and unmitigated population growth. So the population is not stalled, coal is just one of the technologies, probably we'll do a lot more nuclear than we will coal in the long run, and technological progress is not stalled it's the opposite. So it's a discredited model but the AP still ran with it because it fit their narrative.

Now here's my question. How many models are there? And if there are more than one model isn't that proof that the models aren't real? To me it is. If you had one model I'd say that might be useful. I mean I'd watch it to see if it could predict. But if you have a hundred models and they're all based on different assumptions such as how much coal you use etc. like I just mentioned, if they have different assumptions and there's a hundred of them and they go in different directions doesn't that mean they're not real? Because I would think that even if you knew which assumptions are the real ones that then you would get into how did they calculate the end point and you'd find it's yeah there's no such thing as predicting the future with complicated models of any kind. It's not true in climate, it's not true in finance, it's not true in anything anywhere. There's no such thing as a complicated many variable model that tells you the future. Never will be unless AI can figure it out. So where do you find out about climate models is what I like to say. Way more to find o