Talk on YouTube – No Certain Doom: On the Accuracy of Projected Global Average Surface Air Temperatures
Patrick Frank, PhD presents at the 34th Annual DDP meeting, July 10, 2016, Omaha, Nebraska. Dr. Frank, a chemist at the Synchrotron Radiation Lightsource (SLAC) at Stanford University, has authored 68 peer-reviewed publications.
Wazza,
The modellers inability to understand the difference between precision and error etc does not surprise me at all. Climate science came out of the geography department, and they really truly believe it. So the battle is not over science but belief.
Little wonder no one is making any headway in this issue.
It’s not well understood that precision and accuracy vary inversely.
I could give you a very accurate weather forecast. However, it wouldn’t be very precise. Similarly, I could give a very precise forecast, but it would be very unlikely to be accurate.
Most people when they see a precise forecast/prediction, assume it’s accurate, and this is especially true if the forecast comes from a computer.
This is a current presentation that, as he says right at the end, should/could have been done by any competent scientist with a reasonable understanding of climate physics and statistics 25 years ago and, if done, would have stopped all this nonsense dead!! It’s 42 min but worth the watch and remember that there are many inputs affecting the climate models, not just clouds, so the 4 W/m2 error from clouds is just the start.
The IPCC have probably said it clearest themselves when they stated
“In climate research and modelling, we should recognize that we are dealing with a coupled-nonlinear chaotic system, and therefore that long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.” IPCC Third Assessment Report (2001), Section 14.2.2.2, page 774
They really should listen to their own advice because this proves it!! I wonder why he is having so much trouble getting it published??