ATTN Deniers: computer models - should we trust them?

[SpidermanTuba]

The difference of a computer simulation of the entire world and a "car crash" is the weight difference between a grain of sand and Mt. St. Helen's.

I didn't know that computer models were measured in units of weight, that's a new one to me.

Climate models don't simulate the entire world. They simulate the world's climate.

Which covers the entire world. Ha ha ha ha.

Then you add in geothermal heat and debris from volcanoes, reflected and absorbed heat in the oceans, chemicals in the atmosphere, reflectivity of ice, and on and on and on......

My bad, didn't realize you were being sarcastic.

 

[The T]

Which covers the entire world. Ha ha ha ha.

Then you add in geothermal heat and debris from volcanoes, reflected and absorbed heat in the oceans, chemicals in the atmosphere, reflectivity of ice, and on and on and on......

Where does the HEAT go? Is it perpetual? Does it dissipate?

Heat escapes through the Earth's atmosphere as electromagnetic radiation -primarily in the IR band.

OK...Cool. Thanks for that. So could it be said that *WE* aren't subceptable to the 'Greenhouse Effect' say as VENUS is then?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

I have other things to do with my time. Why aren't you out on the street with your sandwich board screaming "The end of the world is coming!"

My bad. I thought you actually wanted to verify the computer models. Turns out you just want to say they are wrong because you feel like they must be wrong and leave it at that.

I wonder if the right knows computer models are based on "physics"?

Simple flow through three orifice. Wonder how much computer power it took?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5aWKwRo7aOg]YouTube - Tunnel SIMPLE flow (Navier--Stokes)[/ame]

The models I run for my thesis work take about 1-3 weeks running on 64 or 128 processors.

 

[Big Fitz]

Acomputer model, even a good one can be manipulated to produce any desired predetermined result. GIGO

Then why hasn't anyone been able to produce a computer model that produces results which contradict those of the GCM's listed?

Code audit information from those who have more time, interest and skill in debunking crackpot code designed to produce a specific result. And it's already been done.

Climategate: The Smoking Code | Watts Up With That?

American Thinker: CRU's Source Code: Climategate Uncovered

A collection of multiple debunker's information

CRU Commented Source Code Tells Story


There you go spuddytuber.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

empty

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Acomputer model, even a good one can be manipulated to produce any desired predetermined result. GIGO

Then why hasn't anyone been able to produce a computer model that produces results which contradict those of the GCM's listed?

Code audit information from those who have more time, interest and skill in debunking crackpot code designed to produce a specific result. And it's already been done.

Climategate: The Smoking Code | Watts Up With That?

In all the fuss around the supposed smoking gun inside one of the source code files from the CRU Hack no one seems to be pointing something out... the so called fudge factor that is in the program isn't used.

John Graham-Cumming: About that CRU Hack

The critical thing to look for is yearlyadj which is the magic value that everyone is so excited about. But guess what? It's never referenced in the rest of the program. So much for a smoking gun.

ROTFLMAO!!!!

 

[nraforlife]

Then why hasn't anyone been able to produce a computer model that produces results which contradict those of the GCM's listed?

The short answer is because all of the paying jobs involve PROMOTING the GW scam.

 

[Skull Pilot]

G.i.g.o.

 

[rdean]

That's great. The links above don't go to his site. The top one goes to MIT.

They're all on Mann's propaganda site as source material...They're all in the same scaremonger circle jerk.

I may have been born at night, but not last night.

How do you type with your head in the sand?

Are you sure that's sand?

 

[rdean]

Do you understand the term "directly" ? If you seriously are this ignorant with regards to what AGW even says, what are you doing here?

"Cryptic we are, yessss" says Master Yoda

So what does the CO2 do, cause more sunlight? Force more water vapor into the air?

After you blow up on "Directly" are you going to underscore the word "heat"

The CO2 absorbs the infrared radiation from the Earth's surface. That you don't know this is a testament to you massive stupidity and ignorance.

See what you did? You herrrt hzzz widdow feewings. He left and went to "gweener" pastures.

 

[rdean]

Then why hasn't anyone been able to produce a computer model that produces results which contradict those of the GCM's listed?

The short answer is because all of the paying jobs involve PROMOTING the GW scam.

That's the "short delusional" answer.

Computer models are based on physics.

Def of physics (fzks)
1. The scientific study of matter, energy, space, and time, and of the relations between them.
2. The behavior of a given physical system, especially as understood by a physical theory.

A computer is basically a big calculator.

Physics is all "math".

See some slight connection????

Conservatives and science - a situation fraught with humor.

 

[rdean]

Someone told me I don't know what climate is.

My Def:

Which covers the entire world. Ha ha ha ha.

Then you add in geothermal heat and debris from volcanoes, reflected and absorbed heat in the oceans, chemicals in the atmosphere, reflectivity of ice, and on and on and on......

Def of Climate from Online Dict:

climate (klmt)
The general or average weather conditions of a certain region, including temperature, rainfall, and wind. On Earth, climate is most affected by latitude, the tilt of the Earth's axis, the movements of the Earth's wind belts, the difference in temperatures of land and sea, and topography. Human activity, especially relating to actions relating to the depletion of the ozone layer, is also an important factor.

Not sure what the difference is. I'm sure some conservative could explain it to me. Often, their explanations are very entertaining.