Re: Climatological models was: More proof that global warming is a hoax ...

Tom Linden wrote:

On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 01:35:28 -0800, Dr. Dweeb <spam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Bill Todd wrote:

Tom Linden wrote:

...

30 years ago VAX hadn't yet come out; automotive ignition systems
had no electronics; I was working on an Interdata 70 with 32k of
core memory. Since then (according to Moore's law) computer systems
have become 1 million times more powerful and all sciences have
advanced but you are still under the impression that climate models
are where you left them 30 years ago. Gee what a pessimist.


But the physics hasn't changed. Your presumption that it is because
of lack of computer power is misguided. The belief that given
enough computer power you make accurate predictions is naive to the
extreme and indicates a lack of familiarty with the undelying
science, which has not changed.


That's one of the more laughable statements (at least if you ignore
boob's) to have been made here recently. While the underlying physics
hasn't changed, the past 30 years have certainly improved our
understanding of how it applies to climate (and how to realize that
in a model) as well as provided significant amounts of new data to
work with (both current and geological). Many orders of magnitude
more compute power to model with haven't hurt either.


No amount of computer resources will reach a correct conclusion using a
modelling algorithm that is wrong and/or incomplete. The bottom line is
that despite what we should assume to be increasing sophistication,
climatology modelling as a prediction tool for long term patterns is still
at a stage where it has zero predictive credibility. This fact is not in
dispute.

Believing the "results" of these models, in the face of the model's
inability to predict the already known is an act of faith, not science.

Apparently climatology models fail to incorporate basic known cyclical
information (geological and astronomical) and other hard science and
empiricism. Leave out the data that conflicts with the desired result.
There is a good example of this in the paper referenced IIRC without
referring to it.

It's interesting to note that when the subject turns to real physics, you
seem to be very enamoured of a theory/model's ability to predict as the
basis for a theory's value as science, but not when it comes to climatology.
Here you accept on faith your position despite the lack of predictive
capability in the models and theories espoused by the researchers who want
to prove what you believe to be true.

- bill


In order for a model to be a useful and reliable predictor of future events it
should be able to predict the present based on past data, and as far as I know,
no model has yet achieved that success. As we know the world's climate is on the
determined by insolation, and even for shorter periods of time, such as the span
of a man's life, this is not all the predictable
http://sait.oat.ts.astro.it/MSAIt760405/PDF/2005MmSAI..76..969G.pdf add to this
the ocean currents (here is a pretty picture)
http://www.grida.no/climate/vital/32.htm
which greatly influence the local temperature, and you have a pretty complex system
to express in equations, from which you hope to extrapolate a solution a long time into
the future. Mow add to this icreased preciptation on the ice caps due to somewhat warmer
temperatures and melting of the edges for the same reason and its effects on the ocean
currents... throw in burning of the oil fields, a Pinatoba or St. Helens.
Our weather codes are barely good for a week.

As an aside I would add that insults are a purile form of debate and only serve to
lessen the stature and credibilty of its speaker. This discussion is about science,
if you are not familiar with the topic then don't participate.

I apologize for participating in this discussion on COV, this really should be taken
elsewhere.

It really should be. I see that a lot of VMS experienced professionals going into an area that no one has any expertise in and can only vent our frustrations. I sure hope it doesn't alienate any people here that really know quite a bit about VMS. I have written quite a few computer models in my time, but only in regards to electrical circuits.

I think we should give it a quick burial.

Matter of fact, maybe we should ask ourselves a more important question and one that has been nagging me after a few years of observation of the computer industry:

I notice that slowly the operating system arena is being reduced one at a time. Will we be left with only one operating system, namely windows?
I see SGI hasn't produced anything new in a few years time and it looks like they are about to fold. Sun for now seems to be healthy but I notice that they are giving in to the open source movement, meaning giving away their software. I see this as a slow erosion of the company that will soon join the rest that have passed on. Is OpenVMS still considered viable? The windroids never even heard of OpenVMS and some are saying that VMS is pretty much dead to them.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Climatological models was: More proof that global warming is a hoax ...
    ... Since then computer systems ... advanced but you are still under the impression that climate models ... enough computer power you make accurate predictions is naive to the ... inability to predict the already known is an act of faith, not science. ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • Re: Climatological models was: More proof that global warming is a hoax ...
    ... that climate models are where you left them 30 years ago. ... because of lack of computer power is misguided. ... given enough computer power you make accurate predictions is naive ... undelying science, which has not changed. ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • Re: OT -- The Civil Heretic - Dyson doubts Global Warming
    ... the typical global temperature predictions from ... Is he a AGWk believer or denier, ... What most of us dispute is that the science backs the ... the vast Mandlebrot diagram of climate. ...
    (rec.crafts.metalworking)
  • Re: Climatological models was: More proof that global warming is a hoax ...
    ... undelying science, which has not changed. ... certainly improved our understanding of how it applies to climate ... This is not the right forum to debate climatological models. ... otherwise of using their "predictions" as a guide to public policy. ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • Re: That crashing sound...
    ... And if you are a vigilant observer of the global warming debate, you know how inconveniently cold it is in the Arctic this winter for Al Gore and his army of climate alarmists. ... Granting a long overdue forum to noted dissenting scientists, economists and policy experts from around the world, the Heartland Institute-sponsored symposium at the Marriott Marquis offered welcomed reasoned analysis as alternative to last December's hysterical circus which was Bali. ... Even before the first mention was made of activists and media misrepresenting current climate science while completely ignoring the serious inaccuracies in virtually all IPCC documents at Sunday's opening dinner, alarmist groups were busy marginalizing the event. ...
    (rec.martial-arts)