Sentences with phrase «something about these climate models»

There is something about these climate models that I would like to understand.

Not exact matches

Climate models are only valuable if they can tell us something about the FUTURE.

Results... about 1,220 for «There appears to be something fundamentally wrong with the way temperature and carbon are linked in climate models.»

Accepting that climate is the statistics of weather over some reasonable time period, I want to ask about something that climate modelling does not seem to address — thresholds.

Some of the models also involve ensemble calculations, and again it may be instructive for the climate modellers to describe something about the use of these, especially as the public has been involved in some ensemble calculations being run on their pc's at home.

It's very important to grasp this, as if you don't, you'll tend to think that a bad Met seasonal forecast says something about the skill (or lack thereof) of climate models.

-- These storms should penetrate higher as climate warms according to the models, a positive feedback, and satellite data looking at cloud height changes over El Nino time scales show something similar and show the models getting that about right also, for physical reasons we think we understand

At this point, I wish to say something about the misuse of computer climate models by the United Nations» IPCC as a supposed «scientific» mode of divining the Earth's climate over the next 20, 50, 100, 1,000 or even 100,000 years.

«Uncertainty» about whether or not something (very costly), which we do (in the «uncertain» attempt to change our climate from an «uncertain» model - generated threat) will have «uncertain» unintended negative consequences, which could be much more severe than the «uncertain» threat we are attempting to mitigate against in the first place, seems to ba a reasonable justification for NOT doing this mitigating action.

In my discussions with him about climate modeling he has repeatedly made the same point, jstults: It is not that climate models are bad tools, they are just good tools for something other than what they are popularly used for, by IPCC etc..

(2) You again quote T. Howard et al suggesting this modeling exercise, with limited validation of the models, demonstrates something about the performance of future ocean / climate dynamics.

Here is an example of what I'm getting at: * Climate change is a myth or conspiracy - The temperature record is phony - the consensus is just politics * Climate change is unproven - The models are wrong - One hundred years isn't enough evidence * It's not our fault - Volcano's emit way more CO2 - It could be natural variation * A warmer climate is nothing to worry about - It was warmer in the middle ages - A warmer climate is a good thing * Mitigation will destroy the economy - We don't know enough to act - Reducing fossil fuel will destroy us * It's too late or someone else's problem - Kyoto is too little too late - The US absorbs more CO2 than it emits This is very rough example, but if you think it is headed in the right direction, I'd be happy to go through your guide in more detail and come up with something concrete - just give me thClimate change is a myth or conspiracy - The temperature record is phony - the consensus is just politics * Climate change is unproven - The models are wrong - One hundred years isn't enough evidence * It's not our fault - Volcano's emit way more CO2 - It could be natural variation * A warmer climate is nothing to worry about - It was warmer in the middle ages - A warmer climate is a good thing * Mitigation will destroy the economy - We don't know enough to act - Reducing fossil fuel will destroy us * It's too late or someone else's problem - Kyoto is too little too late - The US absorbs more CO2 than it emits This is very rough example, but if you think it is headed in the right direction, I'd be happy to go through your guide in more detail and come up with something concrete - just give me thClimate change is unproven - The models are wrong - One hundred years isn't enough evidence * It's not our fault - Volcano's emit way more CO2 - It could be natural variation * A warmer climate is nothing to worry about - It was warmer in the middle ages - A warmer climate is a good thing * Mitigation will destroy the economy - We don't know enough to act - Reducing fossil fuel will destroy us * It's too late or someone else's problem - Kyoto is too little too late - The US absorbs more CO2 than it emits This is very rough example, but if you think it is headed in the right direction, I'd be happy to go through your guide in more detail and come up with something concrete - just give me thclimate is nothing to worry about - It was warmer in the middle ages - A warmer climate is a good thing * Mitigation will destroy the economy - We don't know enough to act - Reducing fossil fuel will destroy us * It's too late or someone else's problem - Kyoto is too little too late - The US absorbs more CO2 than it emits This is very rough example, but if you think it is headed in the right direction, I'd be happy to go through your guide in more detail and come up with something concrete - just give me thclimate is a good thing * Mitigation will destroy the economy - We don't know enough to act - Reducing fossil fuel will destroy us * It's too late or someone else's problem - Kyoto is too little too late - The US absorbs more CO2 than it emits This is very rough example, but if you think it is headed in the right direction, I'd be happy to go through your guide in more detail and come up with something concrete - just give me the word.

We know the climate sensitivity to radiative forcing to be about 3 °C per 4 W / m2 of forcing to within something like a 10 % uncertainty, base on current climate modeling and the geological record (see Hansen et al., 2008) for details http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abs/ha00410c.html The natural (unforced) variability of the climate system is going to remain highly uncertain for the foreseeable future.

As a consequence, the most important factor for determining the cost of doing something about climate change is the one that is most difficult, and arguably impossible, to model.

In short, that treatise provided the proverbial under - the - hood look at the inner workings of today's state - of - the - art climate models that provide the basis for the belief that global warming is a problem and that something must be done about it.

However, since climate models are better able to capture broad patterns of middle atmospheric pressure (which are strongly linked to precipitation) than precipitation itself, it's likely that we can still say something meaningful about trends in large - scale atmospheric patterns conducive to low precipitation (and, therefore, drought).

Asked by CNSNews about the Intergovernment Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Easterbrook said they «ignored all the data I gave them... every time I say something about the projection of climate into the future based on real data, they come out with some [computer] modeled data that says this is just a temporary pause... I am absolutely dumfounded by the totally absurd and stupid things said every day by people who are purportedly scientists that make no sense whatsoeClimate Change (IPCC), Easterbrook said they «ignored all the data I gave them... every time I say something about the projection of climate into the future based on real data, they come out with some [computer] modeled data that says this is just a temporary pause... I am absolutely dumfounded by the totally absurd and stupid things said every day by people who are purportedly scientists that make no sense whatsoeclimate into the future based on real data, they come out with some [computer] modeled data that says this is just a temporary pause... I am absolutely dumfounded by the totally absurd and stupid things said every day by people who are purportedly scientists that make no sense whatsoever....