Posts Tagged ‘models’

Do you think they’re generally accurate? Worthless? On what do you base this conclusion?

Here is one scientist’s take:

Many of the comments to previous blogs have stated that models are “just” a set of assumptions, and that the processes in the Earth’s climate are so complex that they defy our attempts to model them with any rigor. There are assumptions that are made when models are built, but those assumptions are not simply pulled out of a bag of magic tricks. In fact, arbitrary, unjustified assumptions are generally repelled from the modeling community because, first and foremost, the models need to describe some set of observations and the evolution of those observations, i.e. prediction. Most components of models are, just like my original modeling efforts, a representation of mathematical equations that rigorously describe the motion of the atmosphere. The idea that I and my colleagues would work from some potpourri of unjustified assumptions is, in fact, a bit offensive.

http://www.wunderground.com/blog/RickyRood/comment.html?entrynum=57&tstamp=200801

Jello, welcome to our side.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Climate_Change_Attribution.png

When people make the comment that if we can not predict weather a couple of days from now, how can we predict it 100 years from now, the answer is always there is a difference between climate and weather.

So what makes climate easier to predict? Do we have such a good understanding of the earth’s climate that we can make such predictions? If so why are the oceans cooling and not warming like the models predict? Why did nobody make such a prediction?

In other branches of science, through observation and trial and error one can refine and reduce the uncertainties. In climate science it is acknowledged that the observations of our climate system are inadequate. Trenberth called it a "travesty".
He thinks it is a travesty that we lack proper observations, not that he thinks that the models are inadequate.

How can we model future changes in the global climate with the scientific models available?

Plllease Give Me a good answer!

Thanks!!!

Hearing about climate change predictions is unavoidable, but after about 3 hours of looking on the internet, I haven’t been able to find a published model. Presumably, this would be a 1st law, controlled volume model, which addresses emmissivity, absorptivity, their relationship to greenhouse gases, and the methodology of measuring current mean earth temperature as well as future temperature change. Any published model would be nice though. For all the people talking about these models, I’d think someone would have published it somewhere obvious.

Any help is appreciated.

Someone I know is looking for funding to build a green energy invention. Can’t give details because inventions have to be protected, but if anyone knows of a real source of funding for this kind of thing your help would be nice. It has to be available to the average person though, not scientists and so on.
Also this invetion so far has no working models, but it does not use any kind of fuel and produces no pollution. It is a power unit that will be used to turn a generator to produce electric.

Say for a fact that we know that man is the main driving factor behind climate change. Just because the temperature has risen from a global minimum and CO2 has increased during the same time frame doesn’t mean that CO2 and methane are driving the temperature change.
For MTR and others who spout the use of tree rings etc to recreate past temperature history, than why does the US EPA now is seriously doubting this information? That is one of the points that I am trying to make, the more research into the climate the more the AGW models are being filled with doubts.

The models are hind-cast to fit past climate data. Since this climate data has been altered the models are fundamentally flawed and therefore do not fit the REAL temperature curves going forward. It would make sense that the models don’t parallel observation.