Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Do you reject all GCM climate models out of hand?
You mean Heisenberg's theory on chaotic systems was right???Hurricane models and climate models are two different things.
At least hurricane models have empirical data to use and back up any theoretical data.
And I am talking HARD data, not tree ring ice core interpreted data, or heat island weather station manipulated data.
I think the planet's climate as a whole is too large and complex to model accurately, and those doing the models have an agenda that warps anything useful we could get out of them.
You mean Heisenberg's theory on chaotic systems was right???
I know. I was being sarcastic. The fudge factors is all they have. Nothing they do in a GCM is real. 100 x 100kl^2 is so big that micro circulations within it can change the whole grid square and you wouldn't know why.I'm saying climate models are so complex that fucking with them to get the answer you want is easy.
I was correcting nonsenseWhen you said "I don't care what you think" you were addressing a specific individual. Please put some more thought into your posts here.
You're grossly oversimplifying and I disagree. Both are attempting to do the same thing but over different timescales and with different resolution.Hurricane models and climate models are two different things.
GCMs have empirical data as well.At least hurricane models have empirical data to use and back up any theoretical data.
GSMs have "hard" empirical data with which to compare.And I am talking HARD data, not tree ring ice core interpreted data, or heat island weather station manipulated data.
I think the planet's climate as a whole is too large and complex to model accurately
, and those doing the models have an agenda that warps anything useful we could get out of them.
You're grossly oversimplifying and I disagree. Both are attempting to do the same thing but over different timescales and with different resolution.
GCMs have empirical data as well.
GSMs have "hard" empirical data with which to compare.
This is obviously not based on any quantitative analysis, but your conclusion based on your "feeling". Got it.
Models are being done by many people from all over the world and their work is being utilized and judged by even more people from all over the world. What makes you think they could possibly have and color their results with some common agenda?
He is correct and you are wrong.God you're worthless. And if you didn't care what he thought, you wouldn't respond. But you did so you do so you're a fucking liar to boot.
Monday night football had Tampa and KC, both teams were told not to be in Tampa and go elsewhere. Tampa Bay Bucs went to Miami. Why? They were told it was hitting tampa bay. It's reported as such. Why do you have to deny reality is beyond me.God you're worthless. And if you didn't care what he thought, you wouldn't respond. But you did so you do so you're a fucking liar to boot.
www.wlrn.org
Which model? and what was the margin of error? At five days the MOE was over 590 miles wide. This is what is known as a poke and hope. IF you look at models individually, they didn't get this right at all. This was the average of the ensembles.
did they get the return storm surge like Fort Myers?On this occasion. And you're being subjective. "Very wrong" could be predicting that the Ian would hit Venezuela. Tampa still experienced winds sufficient to drain the whole fucking bay. That's not exactly "in the clear".
He is correct and you are wrong.
The Bucs had made arrangements to play the game elsewhere five days out because the EURO model (the most reliable) had it coming in on Tampa. It wasn't until after the hurricane hit that they decided to have it at home since Tampa did not take a direct hit.
www.buccaneers.com
Monday night football had Tampa and KC, both teams were told not to be in Tampa and go elsewhere. Tampa Bay Bucs went to Miami. Why? They were told it was hitting tampa bay. It's reported as such. Why do you have to deny reality is beyond me.
Displaced Tampa Bay Buccaneers hope to return home before Sunday night game
The Bucs moved their football operations to South Florida to avoid Hurricane Ian and practiced at the Miami Dolphins' facility on Wednesday.
here you worthless piece of garbage. Fk me, fk you.
If you reject the theory that the primary cause of warming observed since 1850 is human GHG emissions almost entirely due to the combustion of fossil fuels, you are an AGW-denier. It you don't, then you are not.Entirely different time scales, size, and scope.
They do not have the same empirical dat hurricane models do because with a hurricane you see the formation, progression, and ending of the entire system, multiple times a year.
Cores and tree rings are implied data, we only have "hard" data for as long as reliable thermometers were around and people bothered to record temperatures thoroughly.
It's based on reality and what I have seen models do, including wastewater models we always get to back verify with actual treatment data once the model is established.
Considering an activated sludge plant's solids cycle is 8-10 days, we can see MULTIPLE lifetimes or the organisms in the tanks, which is impossible with climate models because the time scale simply doesn't allow it.
Considering anyone doubting this is called a denier, almost like being called a heretic, one wonders how much those in your religion actually believe in those models.
Who is correct at what? JC456 that the Bucs were told the storm would hit Tampa? I made no comment whatsoever in response to that.He is correct and you are wrong.
I don't give a shit.The Bucs had made arrangements to play the game elsewhere five days out because the EURO model (the most reliable) had it coming in on Tampa. It wasn't until after the hurricane hit that they decided to have it at home since Tampa did not take a direct hit.
I bet you've got them really worried now.Crick has his head up his ass saying that NOAA predicted it right five days out.
NOAA's model is GFS.
The GFS model had it way out in the Gulf.
NOAA is not reliable.
You are really stupid.
NOAA uses the GFS model. It is their model. Sometimes it is call "the American Model" It was wrong. NOAA was wrong.
Five days out GFS had Ivan way out in the Gulf and hitting North Florida as a Cat I.
The EURO model had it coming in at Tampa and was much more accurate, although it wound up hitting 100 miles south of Tampa.
We Floridians were hoping the GFS model was right. A Cat 1 hurricane hitting North Florida would be a lot less devastating than a Cat IV hitting the populated West Coast of Florida.
NOAA is like all government bureaucracies. It is run by idiot bureaucrats that don't know their ass from a hole in the ground. Look how they got caught fabricating climate data back when Obama was President and they are doing the same thing under Potatohead. Last month it was revealed the idiots weren't even using their own procedures for collecting temperature data.
Here is a page showing how far off the GFS model was for Ivan on Sept 23.
That’s telling huh?Yeah, they announced they were going to Miami on Tuesday. The storm hit the next day.
That’s telling huh?
What it says is that one day before it was Tampa! DOH!Sure is. Tells me them practicing in Miami had absolutely nothing to do with any 5 day forecast.
