Editing Openai/6938382f-f9e4-8003-a158-6d812c1bce84 (section)

===== 3.3 “Magic steps” and circular logic =====

Some semi-magical steps:
* From cloud-fraction RMSE to annual independent flux errors. The jump from a 25-year climatological RMS bias in cloud fields Propagation_of_Error_and_the_Re…  to “annual average ±4 Wm⁻² year⁻¹ uncertainty injected at every simulation step” is asserted more than derived.
* From “models have large structural cloud errors” to “therefore no anthropogenic signal can be evidenced.” That conclusion assumes his particular error-propagation model is the correct representation of how these structural errors affect trend detection, which is precisely the point in dispute.

There is also some implicit circularity:
* He assumes the cloud-error-induced uncertainty is so large that model projections are meaningless, then uses that conclusion to dismiss all detection & attribution work that could have provided empirical checks on his premise.