So, holistically, it would seem like warming (a fever) or Coronavirus (anti-bodies) is part of the planets immune system, but humans are too advanced.
Let's not anthropomorphize things, they don't like it.
Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why
31–40 of 332 posts
Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why
#32I 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…
Typically it's not obvious what to switch on and off for "accuracy".
If your model produces wildly different results from previous models, either you hit on some really big discovery or you made a mistake. An ethical scientist will try to rule out the latter possibility before accepting the former.
Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why
#33...
I mostly somewhat agree with you but unless you find a more appealing package for your arguments, you're just going to exacerbate the bifurcation on issues like this, and definitely not convince or enlighten anyone.
Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why
#34"You are in private mode. Subscribe to continue reading." Ok, that's one more I will not open anymore; seems Bloomberg started using similar "privacy mode" detection as NYT.
I use two browsers for this scenario both on iPhone and desktop. The first browser is my regular one (take your pick) and the second one is Brave with scripts Disabled (one click option in settings). I use Brave when going to sites like this.
Disabling scripts generally doesn't break these types of sites but it does stop them from detecting whatever it is they are trying to detect.
Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why
#35I’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 exactl…
So if I asked you to bet at 50/50 odds that next year would be colder on average than this year, you'd take the bet?
Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why
#36Is it not possible to backtest these sorts of things? If it were, I would assume results would be the first bullet point on articles like this, but I also don't understand why it wouldn't be possible.
Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why
#37I 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…
Tweaking the inputs would help one to identify what factor is causing the difference, which allows you to focus on that. It doesn’t mean you permanently leave it out.
And it does not make a credibility issue. This is how science works — it is a process that strives to be as accurate as possible, not come up with a static answer and stick to it (that’s what religion does).
The ability for science to change and adapt is what makes it so strong. That is the message that needs to always be driven when discussing science; not throwing hands in the air and saying “why do these scientists keep changing their answers? They obviously don’t know what they’re doing”
Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why
#38It's surprising the article doesn't mention CFCs:
> The simulations showed that the rate of Arctic warming in a world without CFCs would be cut in half – a striking effect for a category of substances that are only present in small quantities to begin with. To ensure the result was not simply a quirk of the simulation, the researchers ran the experiment using two different climate models and arrived at a similar outcome.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-cfcs-are-a-ma...
The danger here is that there's something else we fundamentally don't understand about the atmosphere.
Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why
#39I’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 exactl…
History is dominated by the vagaries of human behavior.
Climate is a physical phenomenon which can be modeled. One problem is that humans have an effect on the climate, so models can't predict how much effort humanity is going to put into averting that change. Since that aspect can't be modeled, they produce different projections for multiple cases of human behavior: business as usual, modest efforts to change, aggressive efforts to change.
Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why
#40I’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 exactl…
There being no accurate model doesn't imply climate not changing