Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 332 posts

Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why

#81

Post by Accujack »

giarc wrote: post #29

If 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 Ca…

Not to rain on your parade, but programs like this from big power companies are essentially meant to allow customers to feel good while simultaneously not going through the work and cost of switching completely to renewable power.

That's because the power companies want to keep people from developing competition to them... if enough individuals install solar plants with battery storage, eventually they power company simply won't be needed any more, which is what they're trying to avoid.

By selling "green" feel good power, they quiet the impulse that people like you get to make changes that would impact their business.

It's still good that you choose to purchase green power over e.g. coal fired power, but it's also the power companies you're keeping in business that are causing a lot of climate change, and who have contributed to it all along.

Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why

#82

Post by the_gastropod »

iongoatb wrote: post #46
screye wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ma…

Unbelievable that people believe that the Nordic model of capitalism is "socialism". Capitalism with social welfare is not socialism.

Socialism isn't as narrow a term as you seem to think it is... It's quite a broad concept that can (and does) coexist with Capitalism.

Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why

#83

Post by hnhg »

protanopia wrote: post #69
orev wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 i…

It certainly does hurt the credibility of people saying we need drastic changes now based upon the models. If the answer might change next year, then making a drastic change based upon the current projections seems foolhardy.

They say we need drastic changes based on the best evidence we have along with given the likely outcomes if change isn't introduced.

What you're saying is that you have established a prior that undermines all further evidence presented to you, because it has changed substantially in the past. However, that seems irrational to me.

Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why

#84

Post by claudeganon »

rayiner wrote: post #77
adrianN wrote: post #3

Well, 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.

Even a 5C (9F) warming is not "CATASTROPHE." See: https://www.forbes.com/sites/ucenergy/2018/12/05/will-global... > While it is true that we estimated damages as high as 10% of GDP annually at the end of the century for warming of 15°F above pre-industrial levels, the odds of a temperature change that would drive damages of this magnitude are slim. In fact, they are less than 1-in-100 by our original calculation. Und…

Not a catastrophe for whom is the obvious question here.

Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why

#85

Post by JackFr »

orev wrote: post #37
justadudeama wrote: post #23

I 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 i…

But it should make the scientists more circumspect about public policy recommendations. They're not making evidence-based policy, if yesterday's models are evidence and today's models are not.

> 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).

That's fine. Many public policy advocates throw around the term 'settled science'. But based on what you said, is there such a thing?

Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why

#86

Post by fencepost »

lbsnake7 wrote: post #30

I’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…

are thus an exercise in straight extrapolation based on very complex and interconnected inputs

If I throw a ball to you, your ability to put your hand approximately where it's going to be and catch it is "extrapolation based on very complex and interconnected inputs," and as it gets closer you're able to improve based on additional input.

Sure the models could all be wrong, we could be on the brink of a new ice age, and that ball could suddenly take a sharp right turn and accelerate. I wouldn't recommend putting all your money on either of those as a bet.

Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why

#87

Post by lucisferre »

protanopia wrote: post #69
orev wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 i…

It certainly does hurt the credibility of people saying we need drastic changes now based upon the models. If the answer might change next year, then making a drastic change based upon the current projections seems foolhardy.

Yes it would be terribly foolhardy for us to stop polluting the atmosphere prematurely.

Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why

#88

Post by Udik »

derg wrote: post #19
adrianN wrote: post #3

Well, 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.

Can you even imagine how a Total War economy/society based on transitioning to greener energies, cutting emissions and pollutants, and working on improvements to housing and urban planning would end up looking? Like ignoring the whole climate change thing for a moment (though we absolutely should not do that), just the quality of life improvements to our health and well being this kind of mobilization would bring wou…

Total wars are not known to increase the quality of life. If a transition to a green economy guaranteed such massive economic gains (and no pains) don't you think that politicians of all colours would scramble to implement it? The first step to solving issues is to acknowledge all the difficulties that lie ahead: otherwise you end up in a delusional state in which solutions are obvious and easy and the only reason they're not adopted is that everyone else is evil.

Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why

#89

Post by Gupie »

chrisco255 wrote: post #59
0xffff2 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a problem and you can't do anything about it. We are way past the point where individual action is going to cut it. You have to vote. No other action is going to have a meaningful impact and you shouldn't pretend otherwise because it makes you feel better about yourself.

You going to vote out Xi Jinping?

Elect a government that will ban imports from polluting countries.

Re: Climate models are running red hot, and scientists don’t know why

#90

Post by jokoon »

I live in a small, old apartment in the EU, without proper AC. I'm pretty worried about the next summer. I can crash at a friend where the temperature never went above 26C last summer, despite a heatwave.

I always hope that if heatwaves keep coming summer after summer, governments/the UN will take tough decisions.

If nothing is done and summers are too hot, I clearly see people protesting/striking/blocking roads/etc until governments concede. My biggest fear are consumers that will refuse to adapt their consumption because they will see this as unfair rich-vs-poor restrictions. People addicted to consumerism would easily riot to denounce how capitalism ruined their living standard.

Post reply on HN