[deleted]
Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why
21–30 of 332 posts
Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why
#22The title seems like clickbait, and the last part of the article does explain that the scientists actually know that new cloud models are mostly responsible for the change. The big question is then of course whether the new cloud model is wrong and the temperature increase therefore as well, or whether the new cloud model is more accurate than previous ones and the temperature increase is a real effect. I found anoth…
Or a third, frustrating possibility—the new cloud model is more accurate, but some other inaccuracy in the model used to be balanced out by the inaccurate cloud model.
Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why
#23I am not a climate change denier by a long shot, but stories like these give a ding to the credibility of climate scientists.
> "So we can't throw them out yet."
This might be an elementary view of science, but I think there is a danger here that while everyone is making their models, if anyone is an outlier they go and tweak their model to match the patterns of others: 'Klaus Wyser’s group "switched off" some of the new cloud and aerosol settings in their model, he said, and that sent climate sensitivity back down to previous levels'. That seems to me a questionable reason to "switch off" part of the model - you should create the most accurate simulation possible and trust the output, not tweak the inputs to match literature data.
Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why
#24The title seems like clickbait, and the last part of the article does explain that the scientists actually know that new cloud models are mostly responsible for the change. The big question is then of course whether the new cloud model is wrong and the temperature increase therefore as well, or whether the new cloud model is more accurate than previous ones and the temperature increase is a real effect. I found anoth…
Cloud modelling is only part of it - advances in computing have allowed the reduction of cell size, allowing more detailed and therefore hopefully more accurate physical simulations.
Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why
#25Hold my beer :)
http://climatechangereconsidered.org/
Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why
#26Well, politicians aren't doing anything anyway, whether the models predict catastrophe or CATASTROPHE. Already according to the 3° sensitivity predictions we would need an effort that rivals WW2 to stay below 1.5°. Yet major countries are led by climate denialists.
It's because the predominate feeling of those in power is this issue is overpopulation. And yes a population reduction the type WWII provided would be in the 'right direction'. That this is all 'carrying capacity' and they know how to deal with that. Just need more room to live.
Steve Bannon and Trump are fans, "The authors envision a return to a more traditional, conservative social order as one outcome of a crisis. They also see the possibility of retribution and punishment for those who resist or refuse to comply with the new expectations for conformity. Mr. Trump’s “with us or against us” attitude raises questions about what kind of leader he would be in such a crisis — and what kind of loyalty his administration might demand." https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/08/us/politics/bannon-fourth...
"If they do not yield — kill all males", says the terrorist christians: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Shea#%22Biblical_Basis_fo...
Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why
#27...
I don't see how you brought socialism into any of this.
Ironically, socialism is being sold as a solution that you yourself make very clear. That, the pace of scientific progress is really fast ,and automation is going to make a lot of jobs obsolete.
Socialism (in the nordic sense, ie. capitalism with social welfare) is being proposed as a solution to rising inequality and unregulated for-profit forces in the free market of industries where the consumer has no choice. (medicine, education)
Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why
#28Does anyone know if this is actually true? I was under the impression that climate models have been mostly overshooting reality over the past 40 years
> One question modeling can help answer is called “climate sensitivity,” an estimate of how much warmer the planet will be once it has adjusted to atmospheric CO₂ at double the pre-industrial level. (At current rates, CO₂ could reach a doubling point in the last decades of this century.) This is the old, reliable number that’s come out to 3°C for 40 years. It was as close as anything gets to certainty.
Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why
#29If you are like me, you hate reading articles like this. You know there is a problem but you feel like you can't do anything about it. You recycle, you turn off lights, you have a programmable thermostat but you know it's a drop in the ocean.
I finally decided to do something about it last fall. I researched and have committed to purchasing green power. Every month I purchase 850 kWh for $22 from Bullfrog Power (a Canadian company, I have no affiliation). It's much more reasonable than I thought. I still conserve as much as I can but $22/month allows me to feel like I am doing something. If in 40 years, my kids ask me what I did to prevent climate change, I feel like I'll have an answer I'll be proud of.
Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why
#30I’m a climate change skeptic almost entirely because I don’t trust models. I believe there are too many dynamic things happening in the world for anyone to be able to predict accurately say the next 100 years (solar, earthquakes, volcanoes etc). One way to make me a believer though is an experiment: if I were to give you a 100 year stretch of history and you were able to accurately predict with the models what exactly happened in those 100 years.
The article talks about it a little bit about how the models are used to predict the 19th century to see if they are correct. But the models use the last 100 years as input so of course it will give you accurate output. But the real challenge of the models would be to accurately predict things that are not part of the inputs into the model. I don’t believe that these models can do this and are thus an exercise in straight extrapolation based on very complex and interconnected inputs.