The Climate Models are Even More Accurate than you thought

[code1211]

When we have summers with no sea ice sometime in the 2020-2050 range as most models predict, will you agree that Global Warming is real and/or a threat to humanity?

Is that seriously your prediction?

What do you base this on?

 

[keymanjim]

Again,

"Even though he was so incredibly intelligent, it took a very long time for Data from Star Trek TNG to understand sarcasm, too. Drax from "Guardians of the Galaxy" wasn't too bright, either, but like Data, he also tended to take every statement literally."

Do you really grok why I wrote that?

Because you wanted to be an internet smartass and it didn't work?

 

[code1211]

The most laughable prediction ever. Barring some nation holding 24/7 nuke tests at both poles for the next 50 years (and not even then), that's a bit of a physical impossibility.

His prediction had nothing to do with 50 years. He is predicting no ice in 5.5 years.

Arthur predicted that his host would never run out of ice.

Let's see who's right.

 

[code1211]

Like when it got to 164 degrees Fahrenheit in Iran a couple days ago? Maybe having a lot more places get a LOT hotter seems like a good thing to you, but I'm not too crazy about living in a world where above 100 degrees may well become the norm rather than the exception to the rule.

That wasn't the temperature.

That was the heat index.

 

[code1211]

No - there are limits to the ability of a plant to convert CO2 into food and they can not use any of the CO2 that is located in the upper atmosphere (i.e. the location of the CO2 that will actually lead to global warming).

Now answer my question.

I don;t know about that...

The corn in Indiana is pretty tall right now.

 

[code1211]

[facepalm] So... When the predictions in a flawed model are adjusted down so they more closely match reality, the take away is that the models are more accurate than we thought. [/facepalm] What this proves is that the models were faulty to start with. Now the models show slower warming, just like reality. Yet, the implication in the headlines, is that the climate is now warming closer to what the models predicted. The left really does live in Bizarro World.

You've got it now.

After we change the models to match the real world, the models are a closer match to the real world.

The AGW Scientists are just freaking brilliant!

 

[code1211]

Let's try to break this down another way.

If the temperature measurements taken at sea were measured 2 meters above the surface of the water (as is the case with land measurements), then the temperatures would match the models much more accurately. This is because the models predicted temperature measurements from 2 meters above the surface of the water.

Does that help?

How do the reto-fitters know this to be true?

Have they performed a world wide measure of the air temperature 2 meters above the surface of the ocean?

Why is the warmer air below the cooler air on the ocean?

Is this like the warmer water hiding the heat under the cooler water?

 

[code1211]

So if put a plant into a 99% CO2 environment, the plant would produce at near perfect rates, right? Because as you said, there are no limits in which plants can process CO2.

And you haven't answered my question, so I will ask again. When we have summers free of sea ice in the 2020s-2050 range as most models predict, will you admit to the existence and problem of global warming then?

Why do you have faith in these models?

https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum

 

[code1211]

Let's try to break this down another way.

If the temperature measurements taken at sea were measured 2 meters above the surface of the water (as is the case with land measurements), then the temperatures would match the models much more accurately. This is because the models predicted temperature measurements from 2 meters above the surface of the water.

Does that help?

Can you produce a model that includes that particular caveat?

Not a comment from today about the model. A footnote on the model or shown in the methodology that was used to create the model.

 

[code1211]

Ah, but you see, if the models are predicting accurate temperatures, but we don't observe those temperatures simply because we are measuring the wrong spot, then the models are still correct.

Ultimately the benefit of this study and the benefit of science is general is that researchers can use this information to create models that more accurately reflect where the measurements will be made and thus, they will make the models even more accurate in the future.

People tend to dismiss the models because they are not "accurate" (even though the observed temperatures were already well within the margin of error) or because they are not "perfect." This type of analysis is really awful though. Experts already recognize that the models are not perfect and they work every day to make them more accurate.

They must have some real dandies by now.

They've been trying to get it right for decades and missing by bundles all the time.

 

[code1211]

Setting aside that we do have proxies for temperature measurements past 150 years (with tree rings being extremely accurate for the last several thousands of years) and setting aside the fact that 150 years is enough to get a pretty decent idea of the current climate and thus, dramatic variations from the current average which last several years are more than "just...weather."

No one claims that humans are responsible for the "extreme Jurassic temperatures or the ice age," but do you really believe that the fact that humans did not cause extreme temperatures 65 million years ago is proof that humans are incapable today? Or do you really believe that scientists are incapable of measuring the current influence of nature and distinguishing that influence from human impacts? OR do you want your children to live in conditions similar to those found during the extreme Jurassic periods?

Proof that the climate varied before man is not proof that man does not cause climate variation today.

It is proof that the climate can, did and does vary absent the influence of man.

With this actual FACT in mind, those that doubt the claims that the climate will warm by up to 4.5 degrees C. before 2100 have asked for lead pipe, solid proof that man is responsible for the climate variation that those who present the predictions of dire consequence have created.

Are you saying that the fact that man did not influence climate in the Jurassic is proof that man is controlling climate right now?

 

[Renae]

When we have summers with no sea ice sometime in the 2020-2050 range as most models predict, will you agree that Global Warming is real and/or a threat to humanity?

They were supposed to be ice free by now. Oh, pushed it back for 35 years so the predictors can keep raking in the funding.

 

[Manc Skipper]

They were supposed to be ice free by now. Oh, pushed it back for 35 years so the predictors can keep raking in the funding.

Not so. Show evidence of a climate scientist making such a specific claim.

 

[Threegoofs]

Climate change is good for the planet and mankind. Don't believe the hype.

You really should stick with getting dismantled in one forum at a time. The ACA thread still awaits.

 

[MrT]

You only have something like a 36% chance that 2014 was the hottest year, and that is also contingent of the corrections to historical temperatures not affecting it. Before the last two or so corrections, sometime in the 1930's was the hottest.

No, the adjustments that you are referencing only influenced the North American recordings, if memory serves. And it was adjusted for very valid reasons - there was no standard time period, at that time, for when temperature measurements would be made.

And even if you want to continue to dispute that 2014 was the hottest year on record (as confirmed by several scientist groups), you still have to contend with all of all of the other indicators of global warming in sea rise, glacier volume, and extreme weather events.

 

[MrT]

Is that seriously your prediction?

What do you base this on?

A 2006 paper predicted "near ice-free September conditions by 2040".[14] Overland & Wang (2009) predicted that there would be an ice-free Arctic in the summer by 2037.[15] The same year Boé et al. found that the Arctic will probably be ice-free in September before the end of the 21st century.[16] A follow-up study concluded with the possibility of major sea ice loss within a decade or two.[17] The IPCC AR5 (for at least one scenario) estimates an ice-free summer might occur around 2050.[2] The Third U.S. National Climate Assessment (NCA), released May 6, 2014, reports that the Arctic Ocean is expected to be ice free in summer before mid-century. Simulations by global climate models generally map well to this seasonal pattern of observed Arctic sea ice loss. Models that best match historical trends project a nearly ice-free Arctic in the summer by the 2030s.[18] However, these models do tend to underestimate the rate of sea ice loss since 2007. A 2010 paper suggests that the Arctic Ocean will be ice-free sooner than global climate models predict. They chart the summer of 2016 as ice-free, but show a possible date range out to 2020.[19] This assessment was reported in the press as "US Navy predicts summer ice free Arctic by 2016" [20]

 

[MrT]

I don;t know about that...

The corn in Indiana is pretty tall right now.

What?! HOLY ****!

You need to take that evidence to the IPCC and to the media!

 

[MrT]

How do the reto-fitters know this to be true?

Have they performed a world wide measure of the air temperature 2 meters above the surface of the ocean?

Why is the warmer air below the cooler air on the ocean?

Is this like the warmer water hiding the heat under the cooler water?

You appear to be mis-reading the study. The study notes that the climate models are reporting higher temperatures because they are reporting the temperatures based on two meters above the surface of the ocean. Oceans heat more slowly than the air. Thus, the air above the Ocean will be warmer than the Ocean surface where the temperature measurements are made.

If you want to read the study, you should read the study.

 

[MrT]

Why do you have faith in these models?

https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum

Because it comes from NASA and I tend to be to willing to listen to folks that are capable of putting satellites around Comets.

Oh, and this comes from the SECOND ****ING SENTENCE of the website you copied:

"The upward trend in the Antarctic, however, is only about a third of the magnitude of the rapid loss of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean."

 

[MrT]

Can you produce a model that includes that particular caveat?

Not a comment from today about the model. A footnote on the model or shown in the methodology that was used to create the model.

What do you mean by "produce a model?" You want me to build a climate model for you?

 

[MrT]

They must have some real dandies by now.

They've been trying to get it right for decades and missing by bundles all the time.

If by, "missing by bundles," you mean "the vast majority of measurements are within the margins of error for the predictions produced by the models," then I agree.

 

[MrT]

Are you saying that the fact that man did not influence climate in the Jurassic is proof that man is controlling climate right now?

No, that would be absurd.

 

[MrT]

They were supposed to be ice free by now. Oh, pushed it back for 35 years so the predictors can keep raking in the funding.

That statement is factually inaccurate. You are referencing a quote wherein it was stated that some models predicted ice free summers by 2015. A prediction made by some models that were built nearly 20 years ago.

Science has advanced a great deal in 20 years and this subject has been studied a lot more extensively.

 

[Renae]

Not so. Show evidence of a climate scientist making such a specific claim.

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Arctic summers ice-free 'by 2013'

 

[Renae]

That statement is factually inaccurate. You are referencing a quote wherein it was stated that some models predicted ice free summers by 2015. A prediction made by some models that were built nearly 20 years ago.

Science has advanced a great deal in 20 years and this subject has been studied a lot more extensively.

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Arctic summers ice-free 'by 2013'