View Single Post
Old 11.25.2018, 10:33 PM   #5172
!@#$%!
invito al cielo
 
!@#$%!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: mars attacks
Posts: 42,468
!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses
Quote:
Originally Posted by afreespirit
I don't blame him. That report is pseudoscientific bullshit. Climate cannot be predicted.



This statement is not controversial;


"The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible."
https://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg1/501.htm



Long-term is generally considered to be 10 years and more. Beyond that it's just wild guesses.




if you were honestly criticizing prediction you’d criticize the orange blob’s prediction that “we’re going to have a great climate” (do you need a link?)

also that statement you quote is not controversial when it’s not cherrypicked and presented out of context. the text that immediately follows the sentence you quote is:

Rather the focus must be upon the prediction of the probability distribution of the system�s future possible states by the generation of ensembles of model solutions. Addressing adequately the statistical nature of climate is computationally intensive and requires the application of new methods of model diagnosis, but such statistical information is essential.

i don’t know if you understand math, but there is a difference between predicting states and predicting probability distributions of such possible states

lol!

are you that dishonest? or just an idiot parroting someone else’s scam?

i can’t tell which one with certainty, but the probability that it’s either one of those is *quite high.*
!@#$%! is offline   |QUOTE AND REPLY|