• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Dr. Patrick Frank says the models are incapable of predicting future temperatures.

Lord of Planar

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
55,968
Reaction score
18,574
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Re: Dr. Patrick Frank says the models are incapable of predicting future temperatures

You mean the ones which quite accurately predicted over 30 years ago that we would be living in the warmest decade ever recorded, and coincidentally, we are living in the warmest year and through much of it, the warmest month ever recorded?

You mean those models that missed by so much?

I guarantee that 30 years ago, you were insisting that temperatures would be as likely to decline as rise.

OMG...

That is such a no-brainer. The aerosols covered the skies until EPA regulations cleared them here in the USA, and other countries followed.

How many times must I point out such simplicity?
 

Lord of Planar

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
55,968
Reaction score
18,574
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Re: Dr. Patrick Frank says the models are incapable of predicting future temperatures

IOW: All weather forecasts are total BS.

:lol:

They are much better at predicting within a few days than in the past.

But a few decades... or centuries...

LOL...
 

Lord of Planar

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
55,968
Reaction score
18,574
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Re: Dr. Patrick Frank says the models are incapable of predicting future temperatures

So the author doesn't know what the word "rational" means ?

On the contrary.

Those of you who don't read the papers, but just what the pundits write, don't understand rationality.
 

Lord of Planar

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
55,968
Reaction score
18,574
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Re: Dr. Patrick Frank says the models are incapable of predicting future temperatures

You remind me of a homeopathy salesman.

I guess I just deny science if I won't look at this study of 10x echinacea for melanoma!

You remind me of a Jester in the Kings court.
 

longview

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
37,952
Reaction score
13,234
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Re: Dr. Patrick Frank says the models are incapable of predicting future temperatures

You remind me of a Jester in the Kings court.
Your statement implies a connotation of mirth, which I do not think is in evidence.:mrgreen:
 

Lord of Planar

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
55,968
Reaction score
18,574
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Re: Dr. Patrick Frank says the models are incapable of predicting future temperatures

Your statement implies a connotation of mirth, which I do not think is in evidence.:mrgreen:

Oh, I laugh my ass of at times with his antics.
 

Threegoofs

In mourning for Turtledude
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
58,869
Reaction score
24,030
Location
We had a bad fire in 1871
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: Dr. Patrick Frank says the models are incapable of predicting future temperatures

OMG...

That is such a no-brainer. The aerosols covered the skies until EPA regulations cleared them here in the USA, and other countries followed.

How many times must I point out such simplicity?

You point it out, but I don't see the papers that tell us that's the primary cause of the current warming spike.

No experts agree either, unless it's in the blogs you read, or maybe a Cornwall Alliance talk.
 

Lord of Planar

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
55,968
Reaction score
18,574
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Re: Dr. Patrick Frank says the models are incapable of predicting future temperatures

You point it out, but I don't see the papers that tell us that's the primary cause of the current warming spike.
If it isn't a simple enough reality of science for you to comprehend, that not my fault. Maybe it's a sign you shouldn't be debating such a topic.

No experts agree either, unless it's in the blogs you read, or maybe a Cornwall Alliance talk.
Has anyone disagreed?
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,822
Reaction score
28,339
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Re: Dr. Patrick Frank says the models are incapable of predicting future temperatures

[h=1]Comparison Between Observational Data and Model Projections for Hot Days in Northern Australian Regions[/h]Guest essay by Dr. B Basil Beamish In a recent WUWT post I looked at the number of hot days (Tmax > 35 °C) projected by climate models for Cairns as published in a joint CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology report (McInnes et al, 2015). Several replies to that post queried the reference base of the…
Continue reading →
 

Aunt Spiker

Cheese
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
28,431
Reaction score
16,989
Location
Sasnakra
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Re: Dr. Patrick Frank says the models are incapable of predicting future temperatures


For those who don't know: Science goes back to the drawing board when a model fails to predict the future situation accurately.

Occam's Razor: When your initial assumption is incorrect it takes more and more complex figures to make your model based on that incorrect assumption work. Back to the drawing board: rethink.
 

Threegoofs

In mourning for Turtledude
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
58,869
Reaction score
24,030
Location
We had a bad fire in 1871
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: Dr. Patrick Frank says the models are incapable of predicting future temperatures

For those who don't know: Science goes back to the drawing board when a model fails to predict the future situation accurately.

Occam's Razor: When your initial assumption is incorrect it takes more and more complex figures to make your model based on that incorrect assumption work. Back to the drawing board: rethink.

And the models have been pretty good at accurately predicting current warming from 30 years ago. They're probably much better now.
 

Lord of Planar

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
55,968
Reaction score
18,574
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Re: Dr. Patrick Frank says the models are incapable of predicting future temperatures

And the models have been pretty good at accurately predicting current warming from 30 years ago. They're probably much better now.

That BS again.

What happens if we never started clearing the skies since the 70's?

Any scientist would agree this was due, and predictable, because of our actions concerning aerosols. That is if they studied the facts known then.

What a stupid example.
 

Absentglare

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Messages
36,073
Reaction score
6,861
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Re: Dr. Patrick Frank says the models are incapable of predicting future temperatures

For those who don't know: Science goes back to the drawing board when a model fails to predict the future situation accurately.

Occam's Razor: When your initial assumption is incorrect it takes more and more complex figures to make your model based on that incorrect assumption work. Back to the drawing board: rethink.

That's not accurate on either count.

A MODEL is different than a HYPOTHESIS. If you were talking about a hypothesis, you'd be correct. A model always makes a series of assumptions, and a model is only as good as its assumptions. In the case of climate and weather, we simply do not have the information necessary to have a perfect model, and the complexity of the system being modeled is the source of the deviation between the prediction and the subsequent measurement- a small difference in initial conditions can create a monumental difference in outcomes.

Further, occam's razor suggests that making the least number of assumptions provides the most testable theory. It's about falsifiability, not truth. Occam's razor has never been and will never be any sort of legitimate truth test insofar as "solutions must be simple," in fact, quantum theory and general relativity blow that out completely out of the ****ing water.
 

longview

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
37,952
Reaction score
13,234
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Re: Dr. Patrick Frank says the models are incapable of predicting future temperatures

That's not accurate on either count.

A MODEL is different than a HYPOTHESIS. If you were talking about a hypothesis, you'd be correct. A model always makes a series of assumptions, and a model is only as good as its assumptions. In the case of climate and weather, we simply do not have the information necessary to have a perfect model, and the complexity of the system being modeled is the source of the deviation between the prediction and the subsequent measurement- a small difference in initial conditions can create a monumental difference in outcomes.
But in addition to model not being complex enough to include all the variables, there is also the relative contribution
of each of the variables, and weather they amplify or attenuate the signal from the sun.
Clouds are clearly the largest factor, adding up to 3 C of uncertainty to an input of 1.2 C.
 

Threegoofs

In mourning for Turtledude
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
58,869
Reaction score
24,030
Location
We had a bad fire in 1871
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed

longview

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
37,952
Reaction score
13,234
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Re: Dr. Patrick Frank says the models are incapable of predicting future temperatures

Why not stick to real Science, instead of a clearly biased blog.
http://tmtfree.hd.free.fr/albums/fi...ect_Trends_in_Surface_Solar_Radiation_850.pdf
While the finding were an increase of solar surface radiation of 2.88 Wm2 between 1992 and 2001, I think the closing paragraph
says a bit more.
There is a need to be aware of calibration issues regarding both ground-based and satellite
data that might affect the interpretation of long-term observations. The best available approach
to calibration was used to produce the satellite observations used in this study,
and the most comprehensive global coverage achievable by combining geostationary and
polar-orbiting satellites was used. The magnitudes of the observed tendencies in S at a
global scale were much smaller in magnitude than those reported from ground observations.
So the 2.88 Wm2 was much smaller in magnitude, than those reported from ground observations.
 

Threegoofs

In mourning for Turtledude
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
58,869
Reaction score
24,030
Location
We had a bad fire in 1871
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: Dr. Patrick Frank says the models are incapable of predicting future temperatures

Why not stick to real Science, instead of a clearly biased blog.
http://tmtfree.hd.free.fr/albums/fi...ect_Trends_in_Surface_Solar_Radiation_850.pdf
While the finding were an increase of solar surface radiation of 2.88 Wm2 between 1992 and 2001, I think the closing paragraph
says a bit more.

So the 2.88 Wm2 was much smaller in magnitude, than those reported from ground observations.

This is totally irrelevant to the issue.
 

longview

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
37,952
Reaction score
13,234
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Re: Dr. Patrick Frank says the models are incapable of predicting future temperatures

This is totally irrelevant to the issue.
What do you think would be the manifestation of the aerosols clearing from the skies?
If the energy reaching the ground is increasing, faster the the output of the sun,
Or don't you think a measured energy change of more than half the CO2 doubling energy
in a 9 year period is relevant?
 

Threegoofs

In mourning for Turtledude
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
58,869
Reaction score
24,030
Location
We had a bad fire in 1871
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: Dr. Patrick Frank says the models are incapable of predicting future temperatures

That's right.

Use those blogs!

You really love those bloggers.

I see you're unable to distinguish a summary of hte data from an opinion piece.

I could spend more time looking for another article at a site you would find acceptable, but you'll dismiss it out of hand too, so why bother?
 

Lord of Planar

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
55,968
Reaction score
18,574
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Re: Dr. Patrick Frank says the models are incapable of predicting future temperatures

I see you're unable to distinguish a summary of hte data from an opinion piece.

I could spend more time looking for another article at a site you would find acceptable, but you'll dismiss it out of hand too, so why bother?

Coulda... shoulda... woulda...

You are incapable of an intelligent conversation n this silence.

Maybe you would like to prove me wrong?
 

Threegoofs

In mourning for Turtledude
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
58,869
Reaction score
24,030
Location
We had a bad fire in 1871
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: Dr. Patrick Frank says the models are incapable of predicting future temperatures

Coulda... shoulda... woulda...

You are incapable of an intelligent conversation n this silence.

Maybe you would like to prove me wrong?

Well, first you might need to prove yourself correct.

Lets see some references that state your argument.

Oh, wait.,... you say its an argument you made up in your own head?

Yeah... Ive got actual sciency stuff to do today - I cant be bothered debunking your fantasies.
 

Tim the plumber

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
16,501
Reaction score
3,827
Location
Sheffield
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Re: Dr. Patrick Frank says the models are incapable of predicting future temperatures

That's not accurate on either count.

A MODEL is different than a HYPOTHESIS. If you were talking about a hypothesis, you'd be correct. A model always makes a series of assumptions, and a model is only as good as its assumptions. In the case of climate and weather, we simply do not have the information necessary to have a perfect model, and the complexity of the system being modeled is the source of the deviation between the prediction and the subsequent measurement- a small difference in initial conditions can create a monumental difference in outcomes.

Further, occam's razor suggests that making the least number of assumptions provides the most testable theory. It's about falsifiability, not truth. Occam's razor has never been and will never be any sort of legitimate truth test insofar as "solutions must be simple," in fact, quantum theory and general relativity blow that out completely out of the ****ing water.

Quantum theory and general/special relativity are simple but mindblowing. And produce the correct results.

When a model produces wrong results the assumptions it is using are wrong. The underlying hypothesis is thus wrong. Back to the drawing board.
 
Top Bottom