You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #45: Really? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
Nederland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #43
45. Really?
The rate of warming from 1990-2000 is twice what was actually observed. As I mentioned before, if you include 2000-2010 the results are probably even worse. Do you honestly believe that being off by that much doesn't matter?

FYI, I don't even look at hindcasts. A model's ability to replicate the past is not a demonstration of skill, it is simple curve fitting. You know what the temperature curve is supposed to look like, so you keep tweaking the model until its right. The only true validation of a model comes from comparing forecasts to observations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -Science - "Unlikely" That 2C Goal Remains Attainable, No Matter What Happens Next hatrack  Apr-11-11 12:11 PM   #0 
  - And now back to  pscot   Apr-11-11 12:20 PM   #1 
  - Is this REALLY such a big deal?  FBaggins   Apr-11-11 12:54 PM   #2 
  - LOL  RaleighNCDUer   Apr-11-11 12:58 PM   #3 
     - FBaggins is all for fighting global climate change just so long...  Tesha   Apr-17-11 07:41 AM   #78 
        - Not at all.  FBaggins   Apr-18-11 10:15 PM   #84 
  - Carbon emission limits required to satisfy future representative concentration pathways of greenhous  OKIsItJustMe   Apr-11-11 02:00 PM   #4 
  - Like sands through the hourglass...  XemaSab   Apr-11-11 02:25 PM   #5 
  - I keep telling you people: all you have to do is make me Emperor of the Universe  txlibdem   Apr-11-11 02:26 PM   #6 
  - Say goodbye to the Arctic ice cap  n2doc   Apr-11-11 03:02 PM   #7 
  - Water is wet  Dead_Parrot   Apr-11-11 03:28 PM   #8 
  - Conclusions based on computer models are not credible  Nederland   Apr-11-11 04:02 PM   #9 
  - That word slightly  OKIsItJustMe   Apr-11-11 05:03 PM   #10 
  - Not sure I get your point  Nederland   Apr-11-11 07:21 PM   #11 
     - My point regards your claim, "Conclusions based on computer models are not credible"  OKIsItJustMe   Apr-12-11 08:50 AM   #12 
     - Not sure you read my post carefully enough  Nederland   Apr-12-11 11:40 AM   #14 
        - No, I read it.  OKIsItJustMe   Apr-12-11 01:58 PM   #15 
           - I'm not a fan of models myself  XemaSab   Apr-12-11 02:17 PM   #16 
           - Well, that's what the models predict  OKIsItJustMe   Apr-12-11 03:33 PM   #18 
           - I would agree with this  Nederland   Apr-12-11 03:34 PM   #19 
              - When (in your estimation) will we know enough to act?  OKIsItJustMe   Apr-12-11 04:01 PM   #21 
                 - Like I said, in 20 or 30 years  Nederland   Apr-12-11 05:37 PM   #22 
                    - OK, fair enough, weve waited 30 years. (Can we do something now?)  OKIsItJustMe   Apr-13-11 12:27 PM   #32 
           - Still ignoring the main point  Nederland   Apr-12-11 03:20 PM   #17 
              - That's right, if the models are anywhere close to accurate, we don't have 20 or 30 years  OKIsItJustMe   Apr-12-11 03:48 PM   #20 
                 - Response  Nederland   Apr-12-11 05:42 PM   #23 
                    - It's a gross misrepresentation to suggest that Gavin Schmidt thinks we don't have enough data  Barrett808   Apr-13-11 08:25 AM   #26 
                    - No it is not  Nederland   Apr-13-11 09:54 AM   #27 
                       - So the most recent analysis with the most data is the less useful analysis?  Viking12   Apr-13-11 10:40 AM   #30 
                       - Which model are you talking about?  Nederland   Apr-14-11 12:00 AM   #34 
                       - Gavin: "So to conclude, global warming continues. Did you really think it wouldnt?"  Barrett808   Apr-13-11 12:19 PM   #31 
                          - Yes it is unequivocal  Nederland   Apr-13-11 11:54 PM   #33 
                             - Why would Earth not continue to warm?  Barrett808   Apr-15-11 09:31 AM   #40 
                                - You tell me  Nederland   Apr-15-11 11:00 AM   #44 
                                   - Interesting data but misleading  OKIsItJustMe   Apr-15-11 11:31 AM   #48 
                                   - Did you even look at the graph captions?  Nederland   Apr-15-11 08:18 PM   #56 
                                      - "Trends" with less than 30 years of annual data are noise. n/t  Barrett808   Apr-16-11 10:26 AM   #65 
                                      - Yes I did  OKIsItJustMe   Apr-16-11 02:27 PM   #72 
                                   - You need at least 20-30 years of annual data to infer a significant trend. Here's why:  Barrett808   Apr-15-11 11:49 AM   #49 
                                      - I question if even that is enough  OKIsItJustMe   Apr-15-11 11:56 AM   #50 
                                         - Ok, how about we look at the 100 year tend? (nt)  Nederland   Apr-15-11 08:25 PM   #57 
                                            - Here ya go, straight from NASA:  Barrett808   Apr-16-11 11:01 AM   #66 
                                            - What exactly is your point?  Nederland   Apr-16-11 04:02 PM   #75 
                    - "No, honest scientists know we don't have enough data to render judgement yet."  OKIsItJustMe   Apr-13-11 10:10 AM   #28 
                       - Let's cut to the chase shall we?  Nederland   Apr-14-11 12:03 AM   #35 
                          - CanESM2 is the latest version of CanESM which is based on previous models dating back 30 years  OKIsItJustMe   Apr-14-11 07:08 PM   #36 
                             - You are using the wrong criteria  Nederland   Apr-15-11 01:27 AM   #37 
                             - I guess we need to define accurate  OKIsItJustMe   Apr-15-11 09:32 AM   #41 
                                - Excellent suggestion  Nederland   Apr-15-11 10:10 AM   #42 
                                   - "Why does it matter that the models are all so different?"  OKIsItJustMe   Apr-15-11 11:09 AM   #46 
                                   - It IS true  Nederland   Apr-15-11 08:08 PM   #54 
                                      - Of course it is  OKIsItJustMe   Apr-16-11 02:11 PM   #70 
                                   - Absolute nonsense.  Viking12   Apr-15-11 01:24 PM   #51 
                                      - Absolute nonsense  Nederland   Apr-15-11 08:10 PM   #55 
                                         - So you don't even have a clue about the position you defend so vigorously?  Viking12   Apr-15-11 09:13 PM   #58 
                                            - I certainly have more of a clue than you  Nederland   Apr-15-11 10:08 PM   #60 
                             - So let's look at how accurate those Candian models have been  Nederland   Apr-15-11 02:52 AM   #39 
                                - I guess I don't see some horrible inaccuracy there.  OKIsItJustMe   Apr-15-11 10:56 AM   #43 
                                   - Really?  Nederland   Apr-15-11 11:06 AM   #45 
                                      - Yeah, really.  OKIsItJustMe   Apr-15-11 11:22 AM   #47 
                                         - Make up your mind  Nederland   Apr-15-11 10:06 PM   #59 
                                         - The models are not validated simply by looking forward  OKIsItJustMe   Apr-16-11 02:38 PM   #73 
                                            - Yes they are  Nederland   Apr-16-11 04:25 PM   #76 
                                         - Question  Nederland   Apr-16-11 04:14 AM   #64 
                                            - Yes, I understand what a chaotic system is  OKIsItJustMe   Apr-16-11 03:08 PM   #74 
     - Current Temperature Graphs  OKIsItJustMe   Apr-13-11 10:19 AM   #29 
        - Was it?  Nederland   Apr-15-11 01:31 AM   #38 
           - Um really? I mean seriously!?  OKIsItJustMe   Apr-15-11 03:38 PM   #52 
              - Seriously  Nederland   Apr-16-11 03:45 AM   #62 
                 - 12 years is not long enough to compute a reliable trend  Barrett808   Apr-16-11 11:02 AM   #67 
                 - Ok, how many years do you need? (nt)  Nederland   Apr-18-11 07:02 PM   #80 
                    - Well, 18 years, as I've mentioned elsewhere in this thread. n/t  Barrett808   Apr-18-11 07:22 PM   #81 
                       - 18 *more* years, I meant to say. n/t  Barrett808   Apr-18-11 09:00 PM   #82 
                       - How ironic  Nederland   Apr-18-11 10:03 PM   #83 
                          - Obviously, I meant "years of data" not "more years of observation"  Barrett808   Apr-19-11 10:38 AM   #86 
                 - And 1999 was much cooler than 2010  OKIsItJustMe   Apr-16-11 02:24 PM   #71 
  - "All models are wrong, but some are useful." -- George E. P. Box  Barrett808   Apr-12-11 09:10 AM   #13 
  - Solipsistic pseudo-skeptical babble.  Odin2005   Apr-12-11 10:10 PM   #24 
     - +3 (+/-1.5)  Viking12   Apr-13-11 06:28 AM   #25 
     - Yes, let's wait until models are accurate to 0.001C over multiple lifetimes of the universe . . .  hatrack   Apr-15-11 07:31 PM   #53 
        - Can I borrow a dollar?  XemaSab   Apr-15-11 10:35 PM   #61 
        - Nice strawman  Nederland   Apr-16-11 03:51 AM   #63 
           - A "ten-year period" is not long enough to infer a trend  Barrett808   Apr-16-11 11:03 AM   #68 
           - Nice try  Nederland   Apr-16-11 01:40 PM   #69 
              - This graph illustrates why you can't infer anything from short time periods:  Barrett808   Apr-16-11 07:16 PM   #77 
           - Are you a liar or simply willfully ignorant of what the near term projections actually are?  Viking12   Apr-19-11 10:36 AM   #85 
  - Video shows that it doesn't matter if climate data is exact or not  txlibdem   Apr-17-11 08:40 AM   #79 
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC