Basically: Chaos means we can’t model the One True Earth any better than this, but the fact that the perfectly perfect models have large internal fluctuations between themselves and reality should be no sign that the actual weather can naturally have any sliver of this self-same variability.
Those wondrous climate models. One of the things they predict is more and stronger hurricanes, yet hurricanes have been trending down in number and strength, to the point where this year’s season is so far the weakest on record.
The point remains that if a model’s predictions don’t match reality, it isn’t reality that’s wrong. While this might be the weakest hurricane season on record, it may not be by much. Back in 1992, the first storm of the season (Hurricane Andrew) didn’t form until August 15th.
It really never made any sense. Increase of GHGs in the atmosphere should basically increase the time constant of the system’s effective thermal mass, attenuating cyclical variations. I.e., the extremes between warm and cold should be reduced.
Storms do not trigger off of absolute temperature, but off differences in temperature, as when a low front slams into a high front. If the differences in temperature are reduced, that should decrease, rather than increase, the power of the storm.
But Algore says they had to bump the hurricane scale to 6!
I wonder if the climate models use the same code that predicted an $800B Federal Stimulus Spending Program starting in 2009 would get the US unemployment rate down to about 5 percent by now.
They were pulled from the same physiologic location.
Didn’t Freeman Dyson make just this prediction? IIRC, his claim was that climate models have dozens of parameters that must be adjusted, but there’s absolutely no evidence that these parameters are temperature-independent; therefore, models that can model the present have absolutely no predictive power.
Craig, you magnificent bastard!
Von Storch’s actual comment is right up there.
Basically: Chaos means we can’t model the One True Earth any better than this, but the fact that the perfectly perfect models have large internal fluctuations between themselves and reality should be no sign that the actual weather can naturally have any sliver of this self-same variability.
Those wondrous climate models. One of the things they predict is more and stronger hurricanes, yet hurricanes have been trending down in number and strength, to the point where this year’s season is so far the weakest on record.
The point remains that if a model’s predictions don’t match reality, it isn’t reality that’s wrong. While this might be the weakest hurricane season on record, it may not be by much. Back in 1992, the first storm of the season (Hurricane Andrew) didn’t form until August 15th.
It really never made any sense. Increase of GHGs in the atmosphere should basically increase the time constant of the system’s effective thermal mass, attenuating cyclical variations. I.e., the extremes between warm and cold should be reduced.
Storms do not trigger off of absolute temperature, but off differences in temperature, as when a low front slams into a high front. If the differences in temperature are reduced, that should decrease, rather than increase, the power of the storm.
But Algore says they had to bump the hurricane scale to 6!
I wonder if the climate models use the same code that predicted an $800B Federal Stimulus Spending Program starting in 2009 would get the US unemployment rate down to about 5 percent by now.
They were pulled from the same physiologic location.
Didn’t Freeman Dyson make just this prediction? IIRC, his claim was that climate models have dozens of parameters that must be adjusted, but there’s absolutely no evidence that these parameters are temperature-independent; therefore, models that can model the present have absolutely no predictive power.