Re: Runaway Global Warming Possible!
From: ošin (ošin_at_ragnarok.com)
Date: 01/30/05
- Next message: Paul F. Dietz: "Re: JP Aerospace to compete for America's Space Prize"
- Previous message: Christopher M. Jones: "Re: Early Iragi Turnout Appears Huge!"
- In reply to: Vendicar Decarian: "Re: Runaway Global Warming Possible!"
- Next in thread: Rand Simberg: "Re: Runaway Global Warming Possible!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 15:35:22 -0800
>> Yes. Fix the broken model. If the model causes you to through out cold
>> results, you should not trust the warm results either. A model should be
>> taken all or nothing. A model that is broken is a waste of CPU cycles.
>
> So a model of say... The uniform Keplerian orbits of the planets should
> be
> thrown out becuase we know there are perturbations caused by
> interplanetary
> attractions?
No. Kepler is good. Perturbations, as you point out, and mercury is a bit
off, due to relativity considerations. But for the most part, it all fits
close enough to actual use. The same cannot be said for global warming, and
you know it.
> Is it also your view that the model clockpiece on the wall beside me
> should be thrown out because the minute hand does not move linearly over
> the
> face and can be off by up to 1 minute? Or that it should be discarded
> because it doesn't tell the correct time for objects that are moving
> relative to itself? Or because it doesn't tell the correct time for
> India?
No. Your clock is just fine. IPCC models are not as good as your clock yet!
I said "If the model causes you to through out cold results, you should not
trust the warm results either." So using your analogy, if I had a clock that
sometimes went backwards in time (i.e. cold results) and sometimes went
slowly forward in time (i.e. 1 or 2 C warmer over 100 years), and other
times it went very fast (10 or 11 C warmer) then I would throw out the model
(clock). See? If I had a clock that was as erratic and untested as IPPC
climate models, I would trash it.
> Ultimately all modern science is statistical modeling and therfore
> subject
> to variance from reality in specific measurement regimes.
Variation is fine, if it is moderate. I am not asking for perfection.
- Next message: Paul F. Dietz: "Re: JP Aerospace to compete for America's Space Prize"
- Previous message: Christopher M. Jones: "Re: Early Iragi Turnout Appears Huge!"
- In reply to: Vendicar Decarian: "Re: Runaway Global Warming Possible!"
- Next in thread: Rand Simberg: "Re: Runaway Global Warming Possible!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
