Interesting stuff parrot! This tidbit pretty well describes some of the reason for my skepticism. A conclusion to the piece on climate models
on Real Climate
Quote:
|
While this is just a simple model that is not really very Earth-like (no convection, no clouds, only a single layer etc.), it does illustrate some relevant points which are just as qualitatively true for GCMs and the real world. You should think of these kinds of exercises as simple flim-flam detectors - if someone tries to convince you that they can do a simple calculation and prove everyone else wrong, think about what the same calculation would be in this more straightforward system and see whether the idea holds up. If it does, it might work in the real world (no guarantee though) - but if it doesn't, then it's most probably garbage. |
The inputs to any model are some function of the author and reflect his/her opinions as to what might be pertinent to the hypothesis? The absence or presence of natural influences is important in any(climate) model as is the validuty of each input.Thats why ,as Pooey points out, scientists couch their conclusions in uncertainty.
It remains for a political entity (IPCC) to add certainty from such models and forecast a gloomy(Malthusian) scenario and the press to inflate the issue to a cause? I have repeatedly asked whether it is prudent to ignore natural factors influencing climate change and focus on one 'strawman' (anthropogenic emissions) as a culprit? Why adaptation isn't the soundest way to address the warming trend? We have plenty of time?
Sure pollution isn't desireable and may in a minor sense influence global climate but correlation is not causation.
I notice scientists talking of colonizing the moon in the next few decades(or more). Their approach to human adaptation in the extreme (unearthlike) conditions is to adapt using modern technology and know how? Is adaptation a more prudent approach to increased warming if it continues?? It wont penalize third world countries need for cheap energy. It wont create the need for the entire industrial world to unite in a joint effort at emissions reduction(pretty unobtainable IMNSHO). It wont raise the world price of our cheapest source of energy. It wont impose staggering economic costs on economies?