Quote:
Originally Posted by SlimChance
How does a mathematical equation self test?
if I have a (grossly oversimplified) climate model that states the average temperature (T) = Solar radiation (r) / thermal emission potential of the earth (e), how can it fail itself?
That model would allow me to predict changes in temperature based on changes in solar radiation or thermal emissions. the only way I can find out if it's accurate is to calculate it and compare it to actual observed data.
I've only read observational comparison papers on CMIP5, and they tend to broadly support it, though it doesn't seem to do seasonal changes well. (A study of Argentinian rainfall, for example, found that CMIP5 under/over predicited based on season, but predicited average annual rainfall relatively accurately).
As for the fear of publishing dissenting data, I've never really bought that argument. Science can be vicious, and bullying definitely happens. It hasn't, however, stopped funding and publishing of dissenting papers in other branches - it just means that dissenting papers need to have stronger data to weather attacks. A garbage paper could get by a soft peer review, but good data still leaves hostile peer reviewers pretty much helpless.
|
It is called failure. That is the problem. One can run other simulations and cherry pick their preferred outcome as well...however neither is science. So with a model you believe you can only see if true like you said with observation. Which means waiting out the time is takes for the model to runs its course...then at the end when the results should prove the model you ask yourself...did the computer guess right.
So far all are wrong.
Time after time predictive climate doom models have failed..and get rerun...only to fail again.
Hence since computer models are purely guesses the only way to test is to wait for their inevitable failure.
Some have been spectacular failures.
I will let you google failure climate change prediction models.
And yes...I can trump your model with models on solar minima. Simple but why not just as accurate?
https://principia-scientific.org/mod...ooling-coming/
As for bullying out dissenting opinion...when esteemed scientists in the field call people names like denier you can see the difference. Global warming has become big business as well as ingrained religion in north America.
It is not the same as studying in other fields...however even in the field of ancient hominids you still find some very strong voices. Get enough and you want a job...you have to go with the flow. It is sad as that is not what science is all about.