| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
aidanjt
Veteran
Joined: 20 Feb 2005
Posts: 1101
Location: Rep. of Ireland
|
 Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2012 7:46 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Yet another study confirms AGW.
_________________
| juniper wrote: | | you experience political reality dilation when travelling at american political speeds. it's in einstein's formulas. it's not their fault. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
wildhorse
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 16 Mar 2006
Posts: 148
Location: Estados Unidos De América
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2012 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BoneKracker wrote: | | It was 98 degrees here yesterday and today. |
Great! You almost reached the boiling point of water. Would you kindly vaporise now?! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ahenobarbi
Developer
Joined: 02 Apr 2009
Posts: 336
Location: Warsaw, PL
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2012 8:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wildhorse wrote: | | BoneKracker wrote: | | It was 98 degrees here yesterday and today. |
Great! You almost reached the boiling point of water. Would you kindly vaporise now?! |
I'm afraid BK could have ment Kelvin degrees.
EDIT: Yeah, I know Fahrenheit |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wildhorse
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 16 Mar 2006
Posts: 148
Location: Estados Unidos De América
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2012 8:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ahenobarbi wrote: | | wildhorse wrote: | | BoneKracker wrote: | | It was 98 degrees here yesterday and today. |
Great! You almost reached the boiling point of water. Would you kindly vaporise now?! |
I'm afraid BK could have ment Kelvin degrees.
EDIT: Yeah, I know Fahrenheit |
No degrees Kelvin. Just plain Kelvin. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ichbinsisyphos
Guru
Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 547
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2012 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BoneK at 98 degrees, Celsius or Kelvin, sounds both equally awesome. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ahenobarbi
Developer
Joined: 02 Apr 2009
Posts: 336
Location: Warsaw, PL
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2012 8:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ichbinsisyphos wrote: | | BoneK at 98 degrees, Celsius or Kelvin, sounds both equally awesome. |
Yeah, being able to survive such temperatures and calmly report it to OTW sounds pretty awesome  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Old School
Apprentice
Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 231
Location: The Covered Bridge Capital of Oregon
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2012 8:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tfa wrote: | | That means the observed warming is beyond the variability seen in model simulations where greenhouse gases are kept constant |
Nothing in nature is constant.
_________________
I am not young enough to know everything.
- Oscar Wilde |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcgruff
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 137
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2012 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The point is they're trying to investigate the amount of variability caused by other factors so that they can assess the relevance of any anomalies in the CO2 run.
_________________
the underlay overlay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muso
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 655
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2012 9:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Old School wrote: |
| tfa wrote: | | That means the observed warming is beyond the variability seen in model simulations where greenhouse gases are kept constant |
Nothing in nature is constant. |
It's also yet another computer model that cannot even begin to calculate all of the variables that go into something as complex as our climate.
Garbage in, garbage out.
_________________
If I had a dollar for every time capitalism was blamed for the problems caused by government, I'd be a fat filmmaker with a baseball cap |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcgruff
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 137
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2012 10:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Muso wrote: | | It's also yet another computer model that cannot even begin to calculate all of the variables that go into something as complex as our climate. |
That's kind of a stupid thing to say. It's a model not a freaking copy. Of course it contains fudge factors. Some because we know more detailed values or behaviours simply do not matter, and some because we simply don't know the correct answer so the model will be run with upper and lower limits and the results added to the range of uncertainty so that all possibilities are properly accounted for.
It may be that some factors make no material difference and so they don't need to be included at all. For example, relatively short term phenomena such as sunspot cycles have no effect on larger scales such as centuries or millenia. They would just eat up CPU. Some GCM's have a simple, single-layer "slab" model of the ocean. Others attempt to model ocean currents and heat circulation. Some include a biosphere. Some don't. Early equilibrium models could show some of the effects of CO2 forcing but they could not show timescales. Even so, that's enough to answer some questions because you don't actually need a complete model to investigate all phenomena. The most sophisticated, modern GCMs have a coupled ocean-atmosphere-biosphere and the results of repeated multi-century runs will be cross-referenced with other models.
So there's a little bit more going on than you think. To dismiss the modeling of physical systems because "they can't begin to calculate all the variables" is just damned ignorant. Models do not even attempt to mirror reality, just model it. The craft of modeling is precisely that of knowing how to create a system out of various approximations which behaves in the same way as the real thing in specific circumstances.
Note that the model in question independently predicted a particularly strong North Atlantic warming which is also observed in the real world. How do you explain that? Lucky guess?
_________________
the underlay overlay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wildhorse
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 16 Mar 2006
Posts: 148
Location: Estados Unidos De América
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 1:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Muso wrote: | It's also yet another computer model that cannot even begin to calculate all of the variables that go into something as complex as our climate.
Garbage in, garbage out. |
From where do you just get these ideas? Fox News? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sugar
Guru
Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 579
Location: Morrinsville, New Zealand
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcgruff
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 137
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sugar
Guru
Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 579
Location: Morrinsville, New Zealand
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muso
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 655
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 6:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| wildhorse wrote: | | Muso wrote: | It's also yet another computer model that cannot even begin to calculate all of the variables that go into something as complex as our climate.
Garbage in, garbage out. |
From where do you just get these ideas? Fox News? |
Computer models are used for "Climate Science". Those models cannot include all actual variables which have an effect on climate. If you are trying to examine an incredibly complex system while leaving out necessary variables, your results will be flawed.
But you know this already, as you are a scientist. So I'll just assume that your post was a brain fart.
_________________
If I had a dollar for every time capitalism was blamed for the problems caused by government, I'd be a fat filmmaker with a baseball cap |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aidanjt
Veteran
Joined: 20 Feb 2005
Posts: 1101
Location: Rep. of Ireland
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 9:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Muso wrote: | | Computer models are used for "Climate Science". Those models cannot include all actual variables which have an effect on climate. If you are trying to examine an incredibly complex system while leaving out necessary variables, your results will be flawed. |
The solar system is an unimaginably complex system in its complete, whole physical form. But we've still isolated an extremely large number of predictable generalities by creating, experimenting with, and incrementally improving upon simplified models. That's how science works.
_________________
| juniper wrote: | | you experience political reality dilation when travelling at american political speeds. it's in einstein's formulas. it's not their fault. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcgruff
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 137
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 11:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Muso wrote: | | models cannot include all actual variables which have an effect on climate. If you are trying to examine an incredibly complex system while leaving out necessary variables, your results will be flawed. |
That is a biased and frankly naive attack on the of process physical modeling. Models do not have to include *all* variables, just the ones which are relevant to the question under investigation. Some aspects of the real world can be adequately represented by simplified behaviours; others can be left out altogether because they have no effect on the result.
You could comment on the detail of a particular climate model, and possible weaknesses in its approach, but lumping them all together as equally useless without appreciating any of their differences is just another sign of your unreasoning, anti-scientific prejudice. You would, if you bothered to learn, discover that the shortcomings of different models are a matter of keen interest and constant discussion amongst climate scientists but the basic idea that you can investigate and predict the behaviour of physical systems with computer models is not in question, nor is it unique to climate science.
_________________
the underlay overlay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ahenobarbi
Developer
Joined: 02 Apr 2009
Posts: 336
Location: Warsaw, PL
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 12:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mcgruff wrote: | | Muso wrote: | | models cannot include all actual variables which have an effect on climate. If you are trying to examine an incredibly complex system while leaving out necessary variables, your results will be flawed. |
That is a biased and frankly naive attack on the of process physical modeling. Models do not have to include *all* variables, just the ones which are relevant to the question under investigation. Some aspects of the real world can be adequately represented by simplified behaviours; others can be left out altogether because they have no effect on the result.
You could comment on the detail of a particular climate model, and possible weaknesses in its approach, but lumping them all together as equally useless without appreciating any of their differences is just another sign of your unreasoning, anti-scientific prejudice. You would, if you bothered to learn, discover that the shortcomings of different models are a matter of keen interest and constant discussion amongst climate scientists but the basic idea that you can investigate and predict the behaviour of physical systems with computer models is not in question, nor is it unique to climate science. |
Well modeling is a tricky task. Especially when you can not verify model by running experiment. And are modeling a process that is input-sensitive.
I'm not saying to completely ignore the issue 'cause we are not 100.1% sure climate change will/is happening because of human action and will be not-beneficial. I'm saying that there are more pressing matters. And that I don't want governments using this as an excuse to mess with whatever they want. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
erm67
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 01 Nov 2005
Posts: 130
Location: somewhere in Berlusconia.
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 12:25 pm Post subject: Re: Global Warming is Real! |
|
|
| BoneKracker wrote: | It was 98 degrees here yesterday and today.
And, species extinction is happening! mcgruff was right! Something broke into my bluebird house and there are feathers all over the ground beneath it (must have been a racoon, as opening it requires climbing up a pole and than manipulating a little latch. |
Yes it is true it is around 85F here and I found this in the garden today 
Sun activity models predict an increase in temperatures for the next decades anyway
_________________
Truck!!
A posse ad esse non valet consequentia
Πάντα ῥεῖ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcgruff
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 137
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 12:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ahenobarbi wrote: | | you can not verify model by running experiment |
Climate models can independently re-create many real-world phenomena without being programmed to do so. It would not be correct to say there is no verification against real-world systems.
_________________
the underlay overlay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcgruff
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 137
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 12:50 pm Post subject: Re: Global Warming is Real! |
|
|
| erm67 wrote: | | Sun activity models predict an increase in temperatures for the next decades anyway |
We are at a solar maximum but it's only an 11 year cycle.
In any case, short-term variations such as solar cycles do not affect long-term climate change. They're just a wobble within the signal.
_________________
the underlay overlay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
erm67
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 01 Nov 2005
Posts: 130
Location: somewhere in Berlusconia.
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 1:04 pm Post subject: Re: Global Warming is Real! |
|
|
| mcgruff wrote: | | erm67 wrote: | | Sun activity models predict an increase in temperatures for the next decades anyway |
We are at a solar maximum but it's only an 11 year cycle.
In any case, short-term variations such as solar cycles do not affect long-term climate change. They're just a wobble within the signal. |
And it pretty clear that the sun only has short-term solar cycles, it is fixed object, very simple, it sits in the middle, just burns with a regular 11 years cycle and the earth circles around it at a fixed orbit that creates an annual cycle ......
You are oversimplifying astronomy.
_________________
Truck!!
A posse ad esse non valet consequentia
Πάντα ῥεῖ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ahenobarbi
Developer
Joined: 02 Apr 2009
Posts: 336
Location: Warsaw, PL
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 1:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mcgruff wrote: | | Ahenobarbi wrote: | | you can not verify model by running experiment |
Climate models can independently re-create many real-world phenomena without being programmed to do so. It would not be correct to say there is no verification against real-world systems. |
Can you point me to some models that were build and after that correctly predicted climate behavior for some years? (comparing that to number of models built would be interesting too) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcgruff
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 137
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 1:49 pm Post subject: Re: Global Warming is Real! |
|
|
| erm67 wrote: | | You are oversimplifying astronomy. |
I was referring to solar (ie sunspot) cycles. Obviously that's not the only factor to consider re insolation.
If that's not what you were talking about, what did you mean?
_________________
the underlay overlay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcgruff
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 137
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 2:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ahenobarbi wrote: | | Can you point me to some models that were build and after that correctly predicted climate behavior for some years? (comparing that to number of models built would be interesting too) |
Climate is not weather. It's statistics - a long-term global average with minimum time-units of 35 years or so. So, ideally we'd want to have hundreds of years of climate data to compare with model predictions for 21st century warming and beyond.
Climate models do predict several weather phenomena. For example some models will reproduce the Madden-Julian Oscillation which creates huge systems of thunderstorms over the ocean. Some (most actually) do not. Some simply don't need to, depending on the subject under investigation.
Climate models can be tested against the historical record, beginning at a known point in time. Some features of the Pinatubo eruption were successfully represented by earlier climate models, eg a weakening of the ozone layer and an unusually persistent Arctic vortex (a phenomenon of Arctic wind currents). There are lots of examples like this. These guys aren't stupid.
Models, by their nature, make a superficially easy target for skeptics because the craft of modeling is all about estimates and approximations. Nevertheless, they are very powerful tools.
_________________
the underlay overlay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Off the Wall
