"That's how it works sometimes.

Take a tray of ice, put it in a pot on a burner. The results are predictable, the ice will eventually melt. Computationally modeling the process with fidelity would be considerably more complex. "

But much of the basis for future prediction of "global warming" is dependent on modelling.
Just as, much of journalism is suppose to be dependent on using reliable sources. When Dan Rather says, fake but accurate. He is saying he believe Bush is a bum, but damit he doesn't have a real source that confirms it.
Both are foolish.
Both are merely admitting bias.
One isn't science and the other isn't journalism- unless science and journalism are suppose to be merely the means to cloak your unsupportable opinion in a facade.