Sciencescience

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 11:43 AM

DOES AN ACCURATE CLIMATE MODEL EXIST?

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/05/does-an-accurate-climate-model-exist.php

28 replies, 470 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 28 replies Author Time Post
Reply DOES AN ACCURATE CLIMATE MODEL EXIST? (Original post)
oflguy Jul 2019 OP
foia Jul 2019 #1
oflguy Jul 2019 #2
foia Jul 2019 #6
oflguy Jul 2019 #22
oldenuff35 Jul 2019 #3
Cold Warrior Jul 2019 #5
Nostrings Jul 2019 #4
SatansSon666 Jul 2019 #7
oflguy Jul 2019 #8
SatansSon666 Jul 2019 #9
oflguy Jul 2019 #11
SatansSon666 Jul 2019 #12
oflguy Jul 2019 #13
SatansSon666 Jul 2019 #14
Cold Warrior Jul 2019 #17
oflguy Jul 2019 #23
Cold Warrior Jul 2019 #26
oflguy Jul 2019 #27
SatansSon666 Jul 2019 #10
quad489 Jul 2019 #16
Cold Warrior Jul 2019 #18
SatansSon666 Jul 2019 #20
quad489 Jul 2019 #15
nolidad Jul 2019 #19
SatansSon666 Jul 2019 #21
Micrometer Jul 2019 #28
Iron Condor Jul 2019 #24
oflguy Jul 2019 #25

Response to oflguy (Original post)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 11:46 AM

1. No.

It's too complex to model accurately. You may as well call a phychic hotline.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to foia (Reply #1)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 11:55 AM

2. "Accurate" is a relative term

Most would agree that a model that is 250% off is not accurate.

However, whether by mistake or not, the Russian model has predicted the most accurate results based on satellite data. The others have grossly overestimated their predictions.

The jury is still out, however, as to whether or not the Russians can claim success. Satellites have not been around long enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #2)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 12:05 PM

6. But that accuracy may just be luck.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to foia (Reply #6)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 05:28 PM

22. Yes, out of 32 models from various countries it is possible Russia just may be the most lucky

Even a broken clock is right twice a day

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to foia (Reply #1)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 11:57 AM

3. According to the last study done by Japan man made global warming does not exist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oldenuff35 (Reply #3)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 12:02 PM

5. The country of Japan has endorsed that there is not man made global warming???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to foia (Reply #1)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 11:58 AM

4. CALL THE CLIMATE HOTLINE NOW!



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Original post)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 12:06 PM

7. ooooh. A 3-year old blog.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #7)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 12:08 PM

8. Thats all ya got?

That we've been knowing this for over three years?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #8)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 12:15 PM

9. No. it proves my point that you refer to bloggers for your science information.

Then, like a hypocrite, you talk shit about other people sources, even when they cite the research.
Research you will never read because you are a coward.
you called me a coward for not believing your little videos.. we all see who the coward is now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #9)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 12:25 PM

11. Big talk for someone trying to defend failed models

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #11)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 12:26 PM

12. I'm not defending anything.

Quite the delusion you have.

I'm mocking pseudoscience and the loons that perpetuate it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #12)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 12:30 PM

13. pseudoscience

Like anthropologic global warming?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #13)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 12:35 PM

14. I assume you meant anthropogenic.

Then again, who knows with you.

If you meant anthropogenic, then no, it is not pseudoscience.
You and your precious loons think it is, but we all know how they work and how fucking stupid they are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #14)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 01:42 PM

17. He doesnt know the terminology

Like when he called significant figures significant NUMBERS.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cold Warrior (Reply #17)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 06:25 PM

23. Significant figures are numbers, genius

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #23)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 09:04 PM

26. Sorry genius. There is no mathematical term significant numbers

Just like there’s no such thing as “anthropologic global warming.”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cold Warrior (Reply #26)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 09:19 PM

27. If you took the time to google it, you would learn you are wrong

Last edited Tue Jul 16, 2019, 07:02 AM - Edit history (1)

anthropologic was an autocorrect error

You really think you are better than everybody else. It says a lot about you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Original post)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 12:23 PM

10. What type of climate model is your beloved Russian model?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #10)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 01:07 PM

16. Day wear...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #10)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 01:43 PM

18. He doesn't have a clue

He simply heard it mentioned by some loon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cold Warrior (Reply #18)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 02:42 PM

20. Just like the loon doesn't explain it in the video.

He doesn't explain if all the models in his graph have the same parameters programmed in or not. What's in, what's omitted.
I figure he thinks scientists take data and plug it into a laptop to run a simulation.
Lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Original post)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 12:53 PM

15. GIGO

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Original post)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 02:34 PM

19. No!

Now get ready for real global cooling thanks to a grand solar minimum that experts say will rival teh Maunder Minimum.

This year maybe up to the end of 2050.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #19)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 02:44 PM

21. lol.. Because it was a surprise minimum.

They never anticipated it at all.
They just woke up one day and said, holy shit, a solar minimum is happening..what about our climate models??

Those dumb secular scientists..


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #19)

Tue Jul 16, 2019, 08:08 AM

28. Science, it's hard.

The current best hypothesis for the cause of the Little Ice Age is that it was
the result of volcanic action. The onset of the Little Ice Age also occurred well
before the beginning of the Maunder minimum, and northern-hemisphere
temperatures during the Maunder minimum were not significantly different from
the previous 80 years, suggesting a decline in solar activity was not the main
causal driver of the Little Ice Age.

The correlation between low sunspot activity and cold winters in England has
recently been analyzed using the longest existing surface temperature record,
the Central England Temperature record. They emphasize that this is a regional
and seasonal effect relating to European winters, and not a global effect.
A potential explanation of this has been offered by observations by NASA's
Solar Radiation and Climate Experiment, which suggest that solar UV output is
more variable over the course of the solar cycle than scientists had previously thought.
In 2011, an article was published in the Nature Geoscience journal that uses a climate model
with stratospheric layers and the SORCE data to tie low solar activity to jet stream behavior
and mild winters in some places (southern Europe and Canada/Greenland) and colder winters
in others (northern Europe and the United States). In Europe, examples of very cold winters are
1683–84, 1694–95, and the winter of 1708–09.

The term "Little Ice Age" applied to the Maunder minimum is something of a misnomer, as it
implies a period of unremitting cold (and on a global scale), which was not the case. For example,
the coldest winter in the Central England Temperature record is 1683–1684, but summers during
the Maunder minimum were not significantly different from those seen in subsequent years.
The drop in global average temperatures in paleoclimate reconstructions at the start of the
Little Ice Age was between about 1560 and 1600, whereas the Maunder minimum began almost 50 years later.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder_Minimum

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Original post)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 07:15 PM

24. ....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Iron Condor (Reply #24)

Mon Jul 15, 2019, 08:26 PM

25. So true

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Sciencescience