Live data from Hacker News

Do climate models predict extreme weather?

backreaction.blogspot.com

131–140 of 223 posts

Re: Do climate models predict extreme weather?

#131

I believe in climate change, but if you look into how the climate change computer models are written, it really makes me feel like it is contrived. Here's the problem with climate change modeling, you are modeling a complex chaotic system, you just cannot do it accurately. You have to be honest about it.

If you drive your car off the road in a mountainous region of the US, there is a very good chance that you will hurt yourself and/or damage your car. Scientists can predict this statistically. What scientists want to be able to do is predict exactly which rock will kill you or break your axle. They can’t really do that yet except to make statistical guesses about how much more likely the crash was on the road vs. off it. But we’re heading into increasingly rough country, so please let’s all try to stay on the road.

Re: Do climate models predict extreme weather?

#132
post #130

Statistics are tricky to think about, even for people with technical educations. Something that was a lightbulb moment when someone was discussing professional baseball players. I forget the exact point the blog was making, but it came down to this: many things in life, like the ability to throw or hit a baseball, falls on a distribution that is close enough to a gaussian distribution. But when talking about professi…

If this logic applies here then the increase in “extreme events” almost seems like a non statement. The distribution has shifted (as everyone agrees, though some debate cause) and consequently we will get more extreme events.

The point is it isn't just an increase -- it is an exponential increase. I myself have seen people claim that an author of an article citing an exponential increase in weather disasters is just hyperbolic, when (if the math of the distribution is to be believed) is literally true.

Re: Do climate models predict extreme weather?

#133

I don't really understand the conflict that seems to exist between the title of the article ("Do Climate Models predict Extreme Weather? ") and the body of the article, which argues that event attribution can't be done with much accuracy. So ... "Do Climate Models predict Extreme Weather? ": yes, yes they do. But .... "how much impact does climate change have on extreme weather?": hard to say with much accuracy, but…

There is a difference between asking “is it a good idea to play in the casino with the loaded dice” and “can that one particular loss be attributed to the loaded dice.” I think the second question is interesting, but it’s not really that important compared to the first question. Naturally the second question is the one that’s getting all the attention from people who want to keep playing in this particular casino. I guess that’s better than just outright climate denial, but aim not sure how much better it is.

Re: Do climate models predict extreme weather?

#134
Obviously no, because the factors that would cause extreme weather events are not yet there.

In general, any abstract model has the same relationships to actual reality as cartoons - they look sort of plausible and even convincing, even when a cat or a mouse speaks perfect English.

There should be a clear warning statement, like with GMO labeling, that models are astrology with numbers instead of planets and stars.

And no, no matter how sophisticated, a model will never be more than a cartoon, in the same way that a map would never be a territory.

Re: Do climate models predict extreme weather?

#135
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a climatologist by education and a dabbler in politics, I think you are radically misjudging the ability of most people to have rational discussions about unwelcome statistics. If you say severe weather will increase by 20% due to climate change, people will hear that there’s an 80% chance weather will stay the same. And they say I’m just being alarmist. When I say that this storm may have been enhanced by climate…

> Most of the world is not HN, where nuanced discussions work. Most of the world does not give a shit about climate change unless they will personally suffer in some way. So I lie. So that even if this storm or that hurricane didn’t hurt them, they will have empathy for those who did suffer from a climate-enhanced storm. Because if we wait for everyone to feel the impact in earnest, it will be far too late. This is f…

I’m just a software dev now. It’s mostly just people I meet, though I’ve done some lobbying too. Lobbying is a fascinating thing, because all the staff really wants to know is if this issue could help/hurt them in a campaign. I remember once when Zoe Lofgren told me that while she agreed with my issue, there was zero chance Congress would take it up without handling a bunch of barely related issues.

The lie mainly has to do with people wanting to see the direct cause. But there is never a direct cause to weather. There’s a probability of enhanced storm intensity, because we observe storms getting more intense. Was it that last storm? Maybe. But the answer I give is yes. Because in all likelihood, there is some influence.

But climate change is in fact real, has in fact caused damages. If you are concerned about immigration in Europe, consider that a drought led to a famine led to a civil war led to mass migration. Are there a lot more causes here? Sure. What was the cause? Probably a lot of things. But the weather was surely one of them, and models tell us extreme events become more common under a warming Earth.

Climate change has already affected your life. Statistically, it must be so! Just because I cannot say how exactly it has done so, leads people to discount me. So let’s just pretend I know how, so I have a bare chance of being taken seriously. Else my hedging be mistaken for lack of certainty, by confirmation bias of people who yearn for my uncertainty.

I see it as akin to novels. The whole point of fiction is to create empathy for another point of view, though the method is a thicket of lies. The truth can very often not be looked at directly. Tell a teenager not to worry about what other people think — see if they get it. Tell a person that being racist is dumb, and see no behavior change. But a story might work, as a magick spell to get one to feel empathy, a lie that reveals truth.

Re: Do climate models predict extreme weather?

#136
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The orthodoxy's stance has been to make the most mild predictions possible for decades. And now, we're seeing worse-than-predicted extreme weather events. Go figure.

Mild perhaps, but still leaning in one direction. I don't know that there's been any evidence of more severe weather on average, other than record breaking heat which typically has some x% attribution to climate change (i.e. it would have happened regardless, e.g. recent warm weather in Texas).

> I don't know that there's been any evidence of more severe weather on average...

Have you looked? Because the data is available.

https://e360.yale.edu/digest/extreme-weather-events-have-inc...

Re: Do climate models predict extreme weather?

#137
post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lies of omission are unavoidable when talking to a general audience about any deep scientific or technical issue. A physicist actually explaining Magnetism takes years. If a PHD gives you a short answer their simply lying to you. For example, no ferromagnetic materials aren’t simply all atoms arranged in a specific fashion that’s a monumental simplification.

This exactly. After a year of high school physics and a year of mechanics and electrodynamics, they finally get around to telling you: that was kind of all lies, here’s relativity. And then a month later they do it again for quantum, and finally admit they don’t know what is really going on. But Newtonian mechanics is useful!

They should state the truth in first year: We have absolutely no final answers for you, and these years will soon be forgotten. You'll earn more earlier taking any job now. Education is overrated in business anyway.

Re: Do climate models predict extreme weather?

#138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I address this mostly to this comment's siblings: the fact that you're upset about the lying bit only reinforces labster's point. I say this based on the comments thinking that the lie is actually meant to deceive, getting distracted with the word "lie" and its connotations, and missing the broader issue. The issue is that the general population can't be reasonably expected to understand how climate change works, and…

> to those that need to hear it, it says what it needs to say to get them to understand what needs to be done This only works if truth is used. The labster seems to be assuming they have credibility; but if they're lying, or if they're associated with liars, they'll lose it (if they haven't already).

That’s not really true. Anyone who has ever taught a freshman physics class is a bald-faced liar. We are absolutely certain Newtonian mechanics does not represent our universe. Yet for some reason we do not assume physicists lack credibility, even though we know for a fact that thousands upon thousands of physicists are teaching an entire semester of lies.

The lies are useful for making good decisions, though. I offer the same. A simplification that does not quite represent reality, but you should 100% consider it anyway if you build a bridge, because it will save you a world of hurt in the future.

Re: Do climate models predict extreme weather?

#139
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why in these discussions it's usually better to talk about specific statistics like 'the chance of a wildfire has gone up by 20%', or perhaps more clearly 'the average time between extreme floods has gone down from once every 100 years to once every 60' (which I find communicates the point a bit more clearly). That said personally I think that should be as far as the discussion goes, talking about a specific e…

As a climatologist by education and a dabbler in politics, I think you are radically misjudging the ability of most people to have rational discussions about unwelcome statistics. If you say severe weather will increase by 20% due to climate change, people will hear that there’s an 80% chance weather will stay the same. And they say I’m just being alarmist. When I say that this storm may have been enhanced by climate…

When you say you lie, your replies are from people who think that you’re being deceptive. I don’t think that’s true and I don’t think lie is an accurate descriptor of what you’re doing. You’re lowering the fidelity of a model you’re communicating. What you’re doing is tailoring your message to a wider audience. That’s not as dramatic of a description as claiming you lie to people, but I think it’s more accurate.

If you want to communicate reality, you need to understand your intended audience. Finding what to emphasize and what to simplify will determine whether people understand you.

Re: Do climate models predict extreme weather?

#140
post #8
post #5

One of the things about "extreme weather attribution" that makes me uncomfortable is the asymmetry of it. To be clear: I'm in no way an expert (or even educated) in the area. To give an example. Let's say there's a 1% chance every year that there will be a catastrophic wildfire in some particular area. Now let's say climate change increases a chance of drought in that area. Then we get a wildfire one year and the att…

Extreme weather can occur in both directions. A year with more rain may be less prone to fire but more prone to flooding. It also does not take natural disaster to notice extremes. People who have lived in the same area awhile will know if there is an unusually wet, dry, hot, or cold year.

Washington has also had unusually wet years that encourage more growth on the forest floor so there is more fuel by the time the 3 month dry and hot season rolls over
Post reply on HN