A recent Forbes (proprietary) column elaborates the point: much of the problem was caused largely by hubristic computer modelers, who thought that algorithms invented in an empirical vacuum accurately represent the real world of risk.
There is a lot of this computer-generated schistosomiasis going around.
The sensible skeptics of climate change theory, such as M IT Professor Richard Lindzen, point out that the hysteria about the topic is fueled not by empirical observations but by computer models. Never forget GIGO: feeding hysterical assumptions into a computer results in hysterical conclusions, only at the end of the exercise the nature of the inputs is lost and the outputs have the facade of “science.” An example is the notorious “hockey stick” model, which came from a program that produces the hockey stick no matter what data is fed into it.
Foster goes on to quote management guru Peter Drucker arguing the need to keep a firm tether to empirical reality:
Forget Drucker’s wisdom, and we wind up with a financial crisis, and with climate change policy in the state described by Right Coast blogger Tom Smith: