Re: Analysis of climate models

From	Sergio <invalid@invalid.com>
Newsgroups	sci.physics
Subject	Re: Analysis of climate models
Date	2018-11-20 21:02 -0600
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<pt2hs4$16qg$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	(5 earlier) <psss6t$1r37$1@gioia.aioe.org> <pstcqi$he4$1@dont-email.me> <pstf7i$j1p$1@gioia.aioe.org> <c76757a7-71dc-46a0-ade7-f373d22ae47f@googlegroups.com> <pt1fsu$1dup$1@gioia.aioe.org>

Show all headers | View raw

On 11/20/2018 11:22 AM, benj wrote:
> On 11/20/2018 10:42 AM, Edward Prochak wrote:
>> On Sunday, November 18, 2018 at 11:46:45 PM UTC-5, Sergio wrote:
>>> On 11/18/2018 10:05 PM, Libor Striz wrote:
>> []
>>>>
>>>> Inaccurate Initial and boundary values have so big impact, that it
>>>>   does not matter much if the model is accurate or not.
>>>>   Completeness and accuracy of data have is much more
>>>>   important.
>>>>
>>>> Even if models were perfect, the dynamic instability nature of the
>>>>   modelled system progressively amplifies data input errors to
>>>>   chaotic results.
>>>>
>>>> It has nice analogy in putting a small ball on top of a big ball
>>>>   and predicting the direction and distance where it will stop.
>>>>  
>>>> You can use as much accurate model as you want, all stands and
>>>>   falls on accuracy of the initial ball position.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> agree,
>>>
>>> Balancing a pencil gets into Plancks constant, HUP, others. No matter
>>> how clever you are, and no matter how much money you spend
>>> on the newest, cutting-edge pencil-balancing equipment, you can never
>>> get a pencil to balance for more than about four seconds.
>>>
>>>   problem
>>> https://www.physics.harvard.edu/uploads/files/undergrad/probweek/prob3.pdf
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> solution
>>>
>>> https://www.physics.harvard.edu/uploads/files/undergrad/probweek/sol3.pdf
>>>
>>
>> This is an interesting problem, but I would not call this the
>> balancing a pencil problem.  This is more clearly the problem
>> of statically balancing a pencil.  IOW, once the pencil is stood up,
>> you are not allowed to change its motion.
>>
>> A closer analog to climate is dynamically balancing a pencil
>> on a movable platform (say your finger). Such a system includes
>> feedback cycles and perturbations. So you can achieve a stable
>> state given even irregular perturbations from light gusts of
>> wind. But if a sudden strong gust pushes the pencil past a
>> certain point, then it will fall.
>>
>> So the climate question in analogy is:
>> Has there been a global change that will push global climate
>> to a new region?
>>
>> Note that I think several of us agree that in the feedback
>> processes, the pencil has basically one, moving the base.
>> But climate has CO2 levels, CH4 levels, H2O levels, moderating
>> sources like polar ice and open oceans. This is not a simple
>> problem of one kind of perturbation and one feedback loop.
>>
>> So thanks Sergio for the pencil balance example. You were
>> making the different point that even with the best data,
>> we cannot know 100% what will happen.
>>
>> I would say this: that we can be pretty certain global climate
>> is changing. But is the current change something outside the
>> normal patterns? I don't know yet. I don't think anyone in the
>> discussion so far has the knowledge to answer the question
>> one way or the other.
> 
> Climate is changing? Duh! Now THAT is where nobody disagrees. I'd call
> that "consensus".
> 
> As for degree, well that thing in front of you is called a computer.
> There is lots of science data available as to whether there is
> significant movement of climate. Journalist "science" (which is
> non-science) is no place to look. Just check the science. The problem,
> of course, is that this issue has TONS of money involved in MANY ways so
> that an enormous amount of lies (propaganda) has been generated. Your
> task should you choose to accept it is to use your best forensic methods
> to try to distinguish true science from political propaganda. Not such
> an easy job.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oN_oynx1D8w
> 
> So next time there is a hurricane and breathless news tells you how much
> it "proves" climate change is dooming us all, now you know better, right?
> 
>> Thanks for all the contributions, folks. I will try to keep up,
>> but I have a lot of other things happening.
> 
> Best is to take the Odd Boinker approach and refuse to examine any
> information that disagrees with your current preconceived ideas. This is
> a lot more comfortable than actually taking time to study the facts that
> may cause you to change your ideas.
> 
>> Happy Thanksgiving to all!
> 
> And yes, Happy Thanksgiving to you too Ed.
> We all want the best for you too.
> 
>>     Ed
>>
> 

yes  Happy Thanksgiveing to all,

remember I found that link on how anyone could publish articles on
climate change for a science mag in here somewhere, like how to pick a
grabber headlines, etc, etc....

Thread

Analysis of climate models Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-10-31 10:22 -0700
  UsedCar salesman cite facts. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-10-31 12:37 -0700
  Re: Analysis of climate models Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-10-31 14:49 -0500
    Re: Analysis of climate models Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 13:00 -0700
  Re: Analysis of climate models benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-31 18:32 -0400
    Re: Analysis of climate models Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-11-01 06:32 +0100
      Re: Analysis of climate models benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 02:06 -0400
        Re: Analysis of climate models Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-11-01 07:33 +0100
          Re: Analysis of climate models benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 10:08 -0400
            Re: Analysis of climate models Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-11-01 15:33 +0100
            Re: Analysis of climate models Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 13:22 -0700
              Re: Analysis of climate models Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-11-14 00:28 -0500
                Re: Analysis of climate models Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-11-15 16:47 -0800
          Re: Analysis of climate models Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-11-01 10:16 -0500
    Re: Analysis of climate models Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 13:16 -0700
    Re: Analysis of climate models Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 16:02 -0700
      Re: Analysis of climate models Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-11-02 20:19 -0500
      Re: Analysis of climate models James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2018-11-04 12:56 -0800
        Re: Analysis of climate models Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-11-05 08:39 -0800
          Re: Analysis of climate models Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-11-05 12:59 -0600
          Re: Analysis of climate models benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-05 14:45 -0500
            Re: Analysis of climate models Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 13:07 -0800
          Re: Analysis of climate models Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2018-11-05 12:34 -0800
            Re: Analysis of climate models Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 13:09 -0800
              Re: Analysis of climate models Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2018-11-16 09:50 -0800
        Re: Analysis of climate models pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-11-05 19:17 -0800
          Re: Analysis of climate models Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2018-11-06 07:16 -0800
  Re: Archimedes "Village Idiot" Plutonium flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-11-01 21:23 +0000
  Re: Analysis of climate models Boris Mohar <borism_void_@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-02 05:21 -0400
    Re: Analysis of climate models Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-11-05 08:04 -0800
  Re: Analysis of climate models Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-11-02 08:31 -0400
    Re: Analysis of climate models Dan Riley <dan131riley@gmail.com> - 2018-11-02 17:15 -0400
      Re: Analysis of climate models Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2018-11-05 12:40 -0800
        Re: Analysis of climate models Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 13:13 -0800
          Re: Analysis of climate models Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-11-18 17:22 -0600
            Re: Analysis of climate models James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2018-11-18 17:48 -0800
            Re: Analysis of climate models Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-11-19 05:05 +0100
              Re: Analysis of climate models Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-11-18 22:46 -0600
                Re: Analysis of climate models Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-11-19 06:59 +0100
                Re: Analysis of climate models Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-11-20 07:42 -0800
                Re: Analysis of climate models James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2018-11-20 08:58 -0800
                Re: Analysis of climate models benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-20 19:17 -0500
                Re: Analysis of climate models benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-20 12:22 -0500
                Re: Analysis of climate models Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-11-20 21:02 -0600
            Re: Analysis of climate models benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-19 11:01 -0500
              Re: Analysis of climate models Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2018-11-19 12:58 -0800
                Re: Analysis of climate models Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-11-20 08:10 -0800
                Re: Analysis of climate models benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-20 12:04 -0500
                Re: Analysis of climate models Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-11-20 22:02 -0600
      Re: Analysis of climate models Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-11-19 07:00 -0500
        Re: Analysis of climate models Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-11-20 08:00 -0800
          Re: Analysis of climate models Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-11-20 21:28 -0500
            Re: Analysis of climate models James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2018-11-21 10:38 -0800
            Re: Analysis of climate models Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-11-25 00:53 -0500
    Re: Analysis of climate models Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-11-05 08:21 -0800
  Re: Analysis of climate models Dan Riley <dan131riley@gmail.com> - 2018-11-02 17:08 -0400
    Re: Analysis of climate models Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-11-05 08:23 -0800
      Re: Analysis of climate models Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-11-05 13:00 -0600
        Re: Analysis of climate models Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-11-05 13:04 -0600
          Re: Analysis of climate models benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-05 14:51 -0500
            Re: Analysis of climate models Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-11-05 13:59 -0600
  Re: Analysis of climate models Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-11-19 07:27 -0500
    Re: Analysis of climate models Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-11-20 08:06 -0800
      Re: Analysis of climate models benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-20 11:59 -0500

csiph-web