Climate modeling has left science. It has become a liberal art expressed in mathematics. Call it equationized loopiness.
The inescapable conclusion is that climate modelers are not scientists. They don’t think like scientists, they are not doing science. They have no idea how to evaluate the physical validity of their own models.
They should be nowhere near important discussions or decisions concerning science-based social or civil policies.
Dr. Christopher Essex, chairman of the Permanent Monitoring Panel on Climate for the World Federation of Scientists, explains why the limitations of computers, in the context of a complex, chaotic system like the Earth’s climate, are inherent and can never be overcome, at least not until some fundamental scientific puzzles are solved.
…. or two, or three [thousand].
Small volcanic eruptions might eject more of an atmosphere-cooling gas into Earth’s upper atmosphere than previously thought…
Scientists previously suggested that weak solar activity or heat uptake by the oceans could be responsible for this lull in temperature increases, but only recently have they thought minor volcanic eruptions might be a factor.
Climate projections typically don’t include the effect of volcanic eruptions, as these events are nearly impossible to predict,
Really. So what else, what other effects, do the “settled science” computer models NOT include because they are impossible to predict? Its not like volcanoes are new occurrence here on earth. And if there is another large scale eruption scientists cannot even measure what it will do to the atmosphere.
according to Alan Robock, a climatologist at Rutgers University in New Brunswick, N.J., who was not involved in the study. Only large eruptions on the scale of the cataclysmic 1991 Mount Pinatubo eruption in the Philippines, which ejected an estimated 20 million metric tons (44 billion pounds) of sulfur, were thought to impact global climate. But according to David Ridley, an atmospheric scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge and lead author of the new study, classic climate models weren’t adding up.
“The prediction of global temperature from the [latest] models indicated continuing strong warming post-2000, when in reality the rate of warming has slowed,” said Ridley.
Ridley said he hopes the new datawill make their way into climate models
I am Shocked! SHOCKED!! The model is missing another variable? Inconceivable!
and help explain some of the inconsistencies that climate scientists have noted between the models and what is being observed.
When the computer models for the earths long term climate predictions is able to simulate 95% correct, is the time when human will have the power to control earths climate / weather-short term or long term.