What AGW is doing to the planet

[mamooth]

Oh but you are so wrong. ANY system can be described in terms in terms of basic transfer functions between inputs and outputs and inspected for behavior characteristics based on feedbacks, storage, delays, ect.. What the fuck do think Climate models are??

They'd be nothing like you describe.

The scientists understand that. A zillion basic functions combined do not make for a big basic function. They make for something totally different. The world is not going to oscillate just because you want it to.

 

[flacaltenn]

Oh but you are so wrong. ANY system can be described in terms in terms of basic transfer functions between inputs and outputs and inspected for behavior characteristics based on feedbacks, storage, delays, ect.. What the fuck do think Climate models are??

They'd be nothing like you describe.

The scientists understand that. A zillion basic functions combined do not make for a big basic function. They make for something totally different. The world is not going to oscillate just because you want it to.

The conditions for a system to oscillate are pretty much described in Linear, Non-Linear, or Stochastic systems theory.. Take your pick.. OR --- continue to be befuddled as to what climate models do with their inputs, outputs and feedbacks.. I suggest that MORE appreciation of these disciplines would HELP the modeling. As in the people that Curry has surrounded herself with on the "stadium wave" work or the work at Max Planck.

Afterall -- only 5% of Climate scientists describe their discipline as a "mature" science and there is are a lot of tools and specialities YET to be incorporated into it..

 

[mamooth]

Curry's stadium wave theory from 2013 predicted no more warming. Given the 2014 and 2015 temperatures, that prediction was clearly wrong.

Back to Feynman. If the experiment disagrees with the theory, the theory is wrong. That issue isn't going away. If Curry is so brilliant, why was her prediction so completely wrong?

 

[flacaltenn]

Curry's stadium wave theory from 2013 predicted no more warming. Given the 2014 and 2015 temperatures, that prediction was clearly wrong.

Back to Feynman. If the experiment disagrees with the theory, the theory is wrong. That issue isn't going away. If Curry is so brilliant, why was her prediction so completely wrong?

Bullshit.. There were no GLOBAL predictions made because they respected that their theory covered only a small but critical part of understanding "a climate model"..

The only predictions had to do with observing thermal flows from tropics to poles and assessing the cyclical and dynamic nature of these processes.. And USING that understanding to explain transient behavior of the climate. Some things were said about that theory helping to explain "the pause" -- but no projections of doom or celebration..

 

[flacaltenn]

http://schopf.cos.gmu.edu/sites/default/files/papers/Suarez1988.pdf
A Delayed Action Oscillator for ENSO...


Control theory - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Although a major application of control theory is in control systems engineering, which deals with the design of process control systems for industry, other applications range far beyond this. As the general theory of feedback systems, control theory is useful wherever feedback occurs. A few examples are in physiology, electronics, climate modeling, machine design, ecosystems, navigation, neural networks, predator-prey interaction, gene expression, and production theory.[1]

http://www.nipccreport.org/reports/ccr2a/pdf/Chapter-1-Models.pdf

Once formulated, any atmospheric or climate
model is simply a “box” that represents our best
estimate of the workings of the atmosphere or
climate. It is our best guess or approximation of the
main processes of the system being represented and
the mechanisms that link the processes. These models
can be as complex or as simple as the model creators
make them.
A model can be statistical or dynamic, and here
we focus mainly on dynamic models, or what are
called general circulation models. In a dynamic
model, the system is represented in three dimensions,
the characteristics of the system are specified at an
initial time, and the system is allowed to evolve with
time in accordance with the governing equations and
boundary conditions that link essential processes.

------

Another strategy in creating model projections is
to first allow the climate model to equilibrate; i.e., to
find a steady climate state under control conditions
and then again under conditions that may exist in the
future (e.g., double the CO2 concentration). Then, one
can analyze the differences in equilibrium climates in
order to project how the climate of this future time
will look. It should be kept in mind that a steady-state
climate may not exist in nature.

Does that last paragraph sound a little like what ole FlaCalTenn was telling you about how NOT to sample "climate sensitivity" from non-equilibrium periods of climate change???

Shouldn't doubt me.. Read my Sigline again...

 

[flacaltenn]

Don't think you ought to be doubting Feynman until we correct some of your many other deficiencies..

 

[mamooth]

I think you ought to get familiar with what your new messiah has actually written. This is from her own web page, March 2014.

Causes and implications of the pause Climate Etc.
---
Implications for the future: II. View emphasizing natural internal variability
.

• The ‘hiatus’ will continue at least another decade

---

She very unambiguously predicted no warming for the next decade. She was almost immediately shown to be completely wrong about that.

 

[Dot Com]

Deniers think this is some kind of parlour game?

Sent from my BN NookHD+ using Tapatalk

 

[flacaltenn]

I think you ought to get familiar with what your new messiah has actually written. This is from her own web page, March 2014.

Causes and implications of the pause Climate Etc.
---
Implications for the future: II. View emphasizing natural internal variability
.

• The ‘hiatus’ will continue at least another decade

---

She very unambiguously predicted no warming for the next decade. She was almost immediately shown to be completely wrong about that.

Not at all. Gave MANY explanations for the pause. Talked in GENERAL terms about her views. NONE of that DEPENDED on their group work in analyzing PORTIONS of the climate system.. Her "continue another decade" for the hiatus is her high probability IF natural cycles and variations and the "stadium wave" heat prop model are present..

You'd have to wait for 10 years to prove that prediction wrong.. Wouldn't ya??

 

[mamooth]

A record high global temp in 2014 already proved it wrong.

If that didn't prove it wrong, then it's not disprovable at all, which puts it in the category of pseudoscience.

 

[Billy_Bob]

A record high global temp in 2014 already proved it wrong.

If that didn't prove it wrong, then it's not disprovable at all, which puts it in the category of pseudoscience.

You dont have a clue.. Yet you continue to embarrass yourself.. Dr Corry is correct, you are just in your own fantasy land.

 

[Zander]

Here is a list of what AGW is doing to the planet:

 

[flacaltenn]

A record high global temp in 2014 already proved it wrong.

If that didn't prove it wrong, then it's not disprovable at all, which puts it in the category of pseudoscience.

If one data point like could disprove a "trend" -- you should burn all the statistics books. And us skeptics should have started hawking a "pause" about 10 years earlier than we did. You just don't get any of this do you????

 

[flacaltenn]

Here is a list of what AGW is doing to the planet:

Almost spit my coffee out on that one.. Should be one thing on the list.. And that is KILLING the other list of REAL enviro causes..

 

[mamooth]

If one data point like could disprove a "trend" -- you should burn all the statistics books.

The statistics showed no pause at all. Deniers faked the pause.

And us skeptics

Faux-skeptics. Real skeptics don't auto-discard every bit of data they don't like.

should have started hawking a "pause" about 10 years earlier than we did.

You could have been totally wrong 10 years earlier. Such a waste.

You just don't get any of this do you????

I admit I don't understand every last detail of the GUCT (grand unified conspiracy theory), but ... who cares? After all, there are many other conspiracy theories I don't understand either. It's not worth the effort. And it's dangerous to gaze into the abyss too deeply.

 

[jc456]

If one data point like could disprove a "trend" -- you should burn all the statistics books.

The statistics showed no pause at all. Deniers faked the pause.

And us skeptics

Faux-skeptics. Real skeptics don't auto-discard every bit of data they don't like.

should have started hawking a "pause" about 10 years earlier than we did.

You could have been totally wrong 10 years earlier. Such a waste.

You just don't get any of this do you????

I admit I don't understand every last detail of the GUCT (grand unified conspiracy theory), but ... who cares? After all, there are many other conspiracy theories I don't understand either. It's not worth the effort. And it's dangerous to gaze into the abyss too deeply.

yo tooth, put up a raw data only graph. Let's see what the thermometers said or let's look at the satellite data.

Anyone can make anything happen after the fact. so grab a raw data set and start manipulating data to your liking. That is the warmer way! Prove that model right and skeptics and planet wrong.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Shell joins BP in corporate exodus from membership of the conservative, free-market lobbying group, which continues to deny the science of climate change .. (the guardian)
Royal Dutch Shell cuts ties with Alec over rightwing group's climate denial