1. Attachments are working again! Check out this thread for more details and to report any other bugs.

National Geographic "The War On Science"

Discussion in 'Environmental Discussion' started by bwilson4web, Mar 1, 2015.

  1. Trollbait

    Trollbait It's a D&D thing

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2006
    21,590
    11,212
    0
    Location:
    eastern Pennsylvania
    Vehicle:
    Other Non-Hybrid
    The consensus is that warming is happening and that humans are a large part of the driving force.
    I haven't heard of any consensus on the future warming rate, and what it may cause to differing regions.

    So questioning the accuracy of the models when it comes to future predictions isn't questioning the consensus.
     
    bwilson4web, cyclopathic and wxman like this.
  2. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web BMW i3 and Model 3

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    27,066
    15,372
    0
    Location:
    Huntsville AL
    Vehicle:
    2017 Prius Prime
    Model:
    Prime Plus
    This points out the importance of 'Science Communicators:'
    There is a significant gap between those who understand a scientific paper and can make informed comments versus lay people who may not have the skills needed to decipher what is going on. For example, weather models predicting storm tracks. It is not uncommon to see multiple hurricane tracks only to have the storm do something close but not exact: Hurricanes: Science and Society: Hurricane Forecast Model Accuracy
    [​IMG]

    So when I read comments like:
    Like the difference between theoretical and applied physics, the recent Higgs boson search validated a physics model. So too 'climate models' are validated by 'empirical' data. To call "BS" on climate models reads like criticism of February 2015 predictions that New York City would receive the snow that did hit Boston. Living in Alabama, we've seen other past weather models problems with hurricanes and tornadoes. What I'm suggesting is:
    • Weather models over time improve their accuracy and prediction duration from hourly towards daily and longer scales
    • Climate models over time improve their accuracy and prediction duration from century to decade and smaller scales
    I don't claim to be a climate or weather expert although some of my Oklahoma farm relatives have been doing it for years. In engineering, we work from standard models and within budget, test scale models in the lab. When deployed in 'real life' we get the final results and hope it comes close. But I have enough skills to read papers and understand whether or not it is solid, speculation, or something worse.

    Bob Wilson
     
    Zythryn likes this.
  3. cyclopathic

    cyclopathic Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    3,292
    547
    0
    Location:
    2014 Prius c
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    The only thing I could add to this statement that science and law isn't the same thing.

    There is no habeas corpus in science, so unlike in court of law just because there is no accurate model depicting AGW it does not mean AGW does not exists.
     
  4. SageBrush

    SageBrush Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    11,627
    2,530
    8
    Location:
    Southwest Colorado
    Vehicle:
    2012 Prius v wagon
    Model:
    Two
    I don't understand the use of accurate here, since the sensitivitity predictions are stated in terms of probability.
     
  5. wxman

    wxman Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    619
    224
    0
    Location:
    Tennessee
    Vehicle:
    Other Non-Hybrid
    Model:
    N/A
    IIRC, there was a survey of "climate scientists" about 5 years ago asking how well they think climate models can project temperature trends 50 years in the future. Something like 2% said very well, and something like 6% said very poorly. So in that survey, the "consensus" was overwhelmingly (~98%) at least somewhat negative about climate model projections. And this was just temperature projections, never mind precip, cloud, or upper flow configuration projections.

    For the record, I never said that climate models were "wrong", just that they are unreliable to the point of being little more than a guess.

    This isn't the issue, at least that I'm addressing. AGW may clearly exist, but we really don't know how the earth's atmosphere/climate will respond to this warming. In my opinion as someone who has worked with atmospheric models extensively, climate models can't reliably shed any light on that. A warmer climate in and of itself in not a negative, other than maybe rises in sea level, since far more people die from exposure to extreme cold than from extreme heat.
     
    #45 wxman, Mar 4, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 4, 2015
    mojo likes this.
  6. cyclopathic

    cyclopathic Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    3,292
    547
    0
    Location:
    2014 Prius c
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    No disagreement here, at least on highlighted part.

    Sea levels may be of concern if you live on the islands/coastal planes, but they are relatively minor. There are maybe some more dire consequences besides gradual flooding if polar ice melts and thermohaline circulation stops. If it happens we might be following the Permian extinction scenario - there is enough methane captured on the bottom of the ocean in clathrate to wipe out life as we know it.
     
  7. SageBrush

    SageBrush Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    11,627
    2,530
    8
    Location:
    Southwest Colorado
    Vehicle:
    2012 Prius v wagon
    Model:
    Two
    There is a whole slew of dire consequences besides sea level rise -- as if coastal flooding is not bad enough.

    Start with ocean acidification
    Emerging infectious diseases
    Droughts
    Floods

    Spidey is going to be ecstatic, because it will remind him of the Egyptian plagues.
     
  8. cyclopathic

    cyclopathic Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    3,292
    547
    0
    Location:
    2014 Prius c
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    and judgement day?

    Honestly after you read on what happened during PTE nuclear holocaust doesn't sound as bad. At least there will be more survivors.
    Clathrate gun hypothesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Permian–Triassic extinction event - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
     
  9. Robert Holt

    Robert Holt Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2013
    1,313
    888
    0
    Vehicle:
    2012 Prius
    Model:
    Three
    Thank you for tracking that down. I'm embarrassed I was too lazy to do so.
    But generally I prefer looking at raw data and analyses rather than trusting any body of experts, although I can get stymied by the "pay wall" of getting the original studies via the Internet. But ignoring facts in aviation, warfare, and related endeavors is often fatal, so I truly do not understand "flying from the facts". The Scientific American article linke by Bob was informative, but still can't see doing faith based actions if my life is at stake.
     
  10. cyclopathic

    cyclopathic Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    3,292
    547
    0
    Location:
    2014 Prius c
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    problem with GW is that it is unlikely to cause catastrophic events in our lifetime. And how many people follow the diet just b/c they may have diabetes or heart attack 30 years down the road (in their lifetime)?
     
  11. Robert Holt

    Robert Holt Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2013
    1,313
    888
    0
    Vehicle:
    2012 Prius
    Model:
    Three
    Good point although children and grandchildren expand the relevant time frame for me to at least 100+ years. ---> motivated giving away RV and a Saturn to purchase Prius.
    Also depends on exactly how point is brought home to person:
    Lying in hospital having heart attack symptoms during an angioplasty in 1995 ---> adoption and maintenance of strict Ornish diet for almost 20 years now.
    Running aircraft low on fuel over Smoky Mountains and finally landing with less than 1 gallon in tank ---> careful attention to fuel management and reserves over next 400 flight hours.
    So people can change given sufficient impetus, not sure how to have that impetus in the case of human-induced climate change.
     
  12. mojo

    mojo Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2006
    4,519
    390
    0
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Vehicle:
    2012 Prius v wagon
    Model:
    Three
    The IPCC climate models have been incorrectly projecting too much warming for over 18 years.
    Every minute that the global warming "pause" continues,take the models predictions to a greater inaccuracy.
    CMIP5-global-LT-vs-UAH-and-RSS.png CMIP5-73-models-vs-obs-20N-20S-MT.png

     
  13. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web BMW i3 and Model 3

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    27,066
    15,372
    0
    Location:
    Huntsville AL
    Vehicle:
    2017 Prius Prime
    Model:
    Prime Plus
    Did you notice:
    [​IMG]
    The last half of the UAH/RSS data never crosses the "0.0" line. We're going to have to see a big dip pretty soon or their data will also show a long-term climate warming. But I also notice something else about the models.

    There appears to be 3 or 4 that since 2000 have been fairly close to the UAH/RSS lines (assuming they are the only ones that matter*.) Remember, these are math models based on various understandings and weighting of the physical processes. So it may be these models 'guessed' a lot less wrong that the others. It makes sense to take a peek at this smaller set to understand where they got it right and look at the ones on the other side to see if there are common elements leading to a higher rate.

    The Scientific method does not guarantee perfection but rather leads to a less bad understanding of what is going on.

    Bob Wilson

    * - My understanding is the UAH line does not include ocean warming at depth. There is a lot of biology that lives in the 3/4ths of the earth covered by water.
     
    Zythryn and Trollbait like this.
  14. cyclopathic

    cyclopathic Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    3,292
    547
    0
    Location:
    2014 Prius c
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    I wonder if these models took into consideration volcanic activity. Also dust storms and iron seeding. And about another 100 things.

    Problem with many statistical models that they work well within range they're defined. Not so much outside of. If the model is built on approximation of physical processes then the question becomes if all processes accounted for and weighted correctly.
     
    bwilson4web likes this.
  15. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web BMW i3 and Model 3

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    27,066
    15,372
    0
    Location:
    Huntsville AL
    Vehicle:
    2017 Prius Prime
    Model:
    Prime Plus
    Exactly!

    Models are not trivial and that it why inspection is so difficult. To properly audit a model:
    • What initial conditions are used?
    • Duration of the model run?
    • Size of the elements?
    • Version of code?
    So the problem with the earlier graph is we don't see:
    1. What initial conditions were used? - there should be point for each run
    2. Duration of the model run? - are they covering decade, multi-decade, century, milinia
    3. Size of the elements? - do they treat the earth as a sphere, layer of air, layer of water or km**3 cells to what depth of water and earth
    4. Version of code? - models do not remain static as they are refined
    When someone posts a 'claim' about IPCC models without these messy details or at least a link to the source, we can assume it is either ignorance and hopefully not inFOXmation.

    Bob Wilson
     
    #55 bwilson4web, Mar 5, 2015
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2015
  16. Zythryn

    Zythryn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2008
    6,154
    4,145
    1
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Vehicle:
    Other Electric Vehicle
    Model:
    N/A
    I disagree. The problem with mankind accepting GW is that many of us can't see the catastrophes that are already happening.
    This is because rare disastrous events have always happened. Only some are recognizing that these are happening more often, and the results are truly catastrophic.
     
  17. mojo

    mojo Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2006
    4,519
    390
    0
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Vehicle:
    2012 Prius v wagon
    Model:
    Three
    Statistically disastrous weather has been happening less often in a global warming world.Less hurricanes less tornadoes less drought less wildfires.
    Only exception is more bullshit from the brainwashed.


     
  18. cyclopathic

    cyclopathic Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    3,292
    547
    0
    Location:
    2014 Prius c
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    Tell it to folks living in California.

    ...but here we go again: GW = weather, and weather is good today, so GW is hogwash.

    Irreguardless it is not weather, the retreating permafrost and polar ice should be your concern.
     
  19. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web BMW i3 and Model 3

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    27,066
    15,372
    0
    Location:
    Huntsville AL
    Vehicle:
    2017 Prius Prime
    Model:
    Prime Plus
    We're having a 'snow day' with barely an inch in Dixie:
    • ~9-10PM were the predictions for the sleet and snow
    • 5:30AM the sleet arrived (I was out fetching breakfast)
    Today's weather model was 8 hours late but ultimately correct. Good models provide predictions but often have variability. And there are multiple models which have variable performance characteristics. So should NOAA throw out their weather model(s) because this one was 8 hours late?

    I don't think so because I got an announcement about 7PM Wednesday evening before that Thursday would be a 'snow day'. So I had time to fetch stuff before the foul weather arrived.

    I'm also interested in the Arctic weather, yesterday. The huge air mass freezing Dixie today was replaced by air from somewhere and at what temperature and humidity? If warm and dry, the Arctic sea pack would not have grown so fast over some parts waiting the Sun's warming rays and some reradiated CO{2} infared rays(*).

    Already the earth tilts and the Arctic days grow longer. For the climate, how many Arctic sailing days will there be in 2015 because the ice sheet is not so thick?

    The models predict polar ice loss and sure enough that seems to be the case by every satellite record. Sea ice lost in the Arctic and land ice in Antarctica.

    Bob Wilson

    * - The CO{2} simply re-radiates IR in random directions. Since it is close to the earth, just under 50% heads towards the earth. The rest heads towards 3-4K space.
     
    #59 bwilson4web, Mar 5, 2015
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2015
    Zythryn likes this.
  20. Robert Holt

    Robert Holt Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2013
    1,313
    888
    0
    Vehicle:
    2012 Prius
    Model:
    Three
    Chatting with agricultural extension scientist in Qaqartaq, Greenland, and he is thrilled that warming is both making their ice cap retreat noticeably and making it possible to grow some types of edible plants in the southern sections of the country. But that ice cap alone would raise sea level over 20 feet, IIRC , which inundates large swathes of heavily populated coastal areas. I do not think those millions will submit to being quietly drowned.