Start with a desired result and work backward and see how fast conservatives jump on the computer bandwagon. They seem to truly believe that if they only cross their fingers and wish real hard they can make anything real.

Now to get them believing in models, start with what they want to believe and use that as the conclusion. Man has had no effect on the environment, except beneficial. Asphalt, concrete, CO2, etc., are good for people, plants and animals. Nothing Man has or will do could ever affect anything so vast as weather. Except positively.

Heck, there are more ants than men, and cows burp. What does your computer model say about that? If it says they are the cause of the non-existent global warming, you've got a good model!

Assume the oceans are infinite, and can supply or absorb anything needed forever.

And wind up with a projection that if everyone only drove 30,000 miles a year instead of 15,000 life would be better for every single endangered specie.

Now get out of the way. Those folks will love computers and simulations. But you gotta come up with emotionally satisfying conclusions. It's an emotional thing, not rational. Forget that at your peril.

Arf