Another Day, Another Extreme Hurricane

It would seem your understanding of modelling and accuracy are not the same as science. Predictions are not exact and never will be because they are "Predictions", you seem to expect them to be post dictions. The base of this modelling is accurate which is their intent, focusing on individual variation within the model is disingenuous and missing the point.
"The Science" is accurate, the interpretation is wrong.

 

So you admit models and predictions are inaccurate but want us to base our lives on them?

 

Please keep your words out of my mouth. I have stated that modeling is not meant as a replacement for observation or absolute prediction of the future. We use this technique to present likely general possibility and probability in order to offer up prediction of future events.

 

Your side made short term predictions of verifiable activity.

Your side made predictions thinking it would give them credibility and increase support for the AGW agenda.

Now that they did not come true, your side has lost credibility, and you are now dancing and hand waving and obfuscating about things such as "individual variation within the model" to excuse your sides failure.

Take a scientific approach: your side ran models and made predictions. They failed. Your side is wrong by your own standard.

If you don't like the result, look in the mirror to see who is to blame.

 

Many of the prediction have come to pass to some extent....some were shown to be high and some lower. That is how all predictions work in anything.

 

"... to some extent..."

You mean the predictions of increased tornado activity (there was a decrease) and more severe tornados (there was a decrease)? Same for hurricanes. And then there was the seemingly miraculous pause.

Don't forget the constantly changing "tipping point", that point of no return beyond which the world is doomed no matter what humanity does. That right there condemns the models.

 

As it is painfully clear you do not intend to discuss this topic in favor of projecting your opinions onto others I believe we are done here.

Have A Nice Day

 

I gave you concrete results, you run away. That's why AGW is a scam.

 

You really should start consulting more reputable sources. The National Climate Assessment of 2014 talks about the models as extremely accurate.

It is notable that as these data records have grown longer and climate models have become more comprehensive, earlier predictions have largely been confirmed. The only real surprises have been that some changes, such as sea level rise and Arctic sea ice decline, have outpaced earlier projections.

These are experts, not politically motivated fossil-fuel industry pundits. Do you work for an oil company or something?

 

And you think we should live our lives based on these "predictions".

 

This is just more of the AGW circle jerk where they all validate each other's study's, statistics, predictions and models.

 

Based on their models, the warmists claimed disaster was imminent and huge changes were required to save humanity (the constantly moving "tipping point"), and to back up their claim they made a lot of short term predictions about storms and sea level and temperature and arctic ice etc. The predictions did not come true, the tipping point would come and go and the warmists would set a new "tipping point". Obviously their models were wrong, their understanding of the climate change on weather was wrong.

Now you write that the warmists have gone back and "reworked" their data and models and claim the predictions were correct? You cannot "rework" ice, its either there or it isn't and everyone can see it. You can't "rework" the number and intensity of hurricanes and tornadoes. You cannot go back in time and change predictions.

The predictions were wrong. Which means the models were wrong. Which means the warmists have lost credibility. "Reworking" does not regain credibility - in fact it makes the warmists look even worse. Their ranting and tantrums and name calling and suing people does not help them gain credibility - they just look childish and foolish.

Warmists were wrong. End of story.

 

I said PLEASE. Now your ignorance has become irritating.

 

So you don't think we should live our lives based on these predictions? We have no conflict then. Let's sing koombyah.

 

I would seriously appreciate you allowing me to express my thoughts....myself. It does not matter what I believe in this, as it will make no difference in the result. I am of the belief that human civilization is simply incapable of joining together to address climate change and AGW and so people should and will do what they have been. The next century will likely see dramatic changes due to the physical realities of chemical interactions of what is already in place, and we will continue to contribute more.
Denial or acceptance of what is occurring no longer even matters because we will all get to deal with it one way or another. Considering the upcoming methane releases ......we ain't seen nothin' yet. Fortunately I will be dead before it truly gets bad but, my kids are pretty much screwed.

 

Warming has always led to greater human wealth and expansion.

 

You would like to believe that it's the "end of the story". That's why denialists ignore the 97% of Climatologists. As mentioned, the models have proven very accurate. If anything, they are erring on the side of a lesser effect of AGW. You should start consulting media sources that aren't part of the fossil-fuel lobby.

In the words of Winston Churchill - "This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. However, it is the end of the beginning."

 

The 97% has been totally debunked. Your use of it proves you are in denial.

The models were wrong. Its that simple. You cannot go back in time and change the weather to agree with your models.

The mistake the AGW crowd made was to believe their models were truly accurate, and they made short term predictions based on them. The predictions were wrong. The AGW gambit failed.

Your side made predictions. Your side failed. It really is that simple.

 

So you believe man is warming the planet and there's nothing we can do about it. I don't believe we are but have said several times if warmers are right there's nothing we can do about it so we are kind of on the same page. I'll go get the marshmallows you start the fire.

 

No reputable scientist would make any link between climate change and the current hurricane year.

We had almost 12 years since the last major hurricane hit the U.S.

 

There have been plenty of hurricanes. It's just by chance that a hurricane hits land. That said, the models show that hurricanes carry more water due to AGW. By the end of the 21st, they will carry 10-15% more water. Assuming a linear model, this puts us around 2% now. That percentage may not sound like much. However, a 24-hour storm could be extended by 30 minutes. In that 30 minutes, levees could overflow, dams could rupture, electrical facilities could see water encroachment, people could die. It's also important to note that the 30 minutes will become 60 minutes for our next generation, and 100 minutes for our grandchildren.

 

Lord spare me from these freaking models.

 

Perhaps you should write the National Academy of Science, and tell them that they don't represent reality. Do it! Let us all know what they say.

It is notable that as these data records have grown longer and climate models have become more comprehensive, earlier predictions have largely been confirmed. The only real surprises have been that some changes, such as sea level rise and Arctic sea ice decline, have outpaced earlier projections.

http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/highlights/overview/overview

 

Can someone provide a link to the source code of the climate model?

 

Do you own a supercomputer?