UN : Global Warming To Cause “Climate Chaos”

http://www.usatoday.com/

Anyone familiar with weather modeling knows that “chaos” is exactly the reason why weather can’t be predicted more than about 72 hours into the future. The weather/climate system is inherently chaotic.

Advertisements

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to UN : Global Warming To Cause “Climate Chaos”

  1. Jim says:

    How ironic, more UN bs on the day they got their asses kicked into touch by the House of Representatives who voted to eliminate funding for the IPCC.

    When will they ever learn?

  2. Scarlet Pumpernickel says:

    2011 is out……

  3. Scarlet Pumpernickel says:

    BTW since the great slaughter of observation stations in 1990 http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/nvst.jpg

    I Wonder whyyyyyyyyy

    • nofreewind says:

      So we have this “scientist using science” stating the cold snap is normal variation, then we have the other “scientists using science” stating the cold snap is due to warming?? Which science is science?

  4. OT

    There may not be climate chaos coming but there is economic chaos coming to America

  5. Scarlet Pumpernickel says:

    http://www.lhup.edu/~DSIMANEK/cargocul.htm

    Cargo Cult Science once again

  6. Andy Weiss says:

    When Steve identifies the proper PPM and we set the thermostat accordingly, peace and love will rule the planet!

  7. Sparks says:

    Well.. it can be predicted more than about 72 hours into the future and in fact it can be predicted infinitely into the future, but with less accuracy the further into future the prediction is made for, but there are long-range forecasters who use known stable astronomical factors (such as where the moon will be at any given point in time) along with the suns solar cycles and what time of year it will be,
    and even using the simple basic questions like, what are the seasons usually like in the area? and they spend alot of time gathering data,
    right down to what the local geology and ecology is like for the a given area,
    I don’t know any forecaster in their right mind who would use the variable levels of Co2 in the atmosphere for any kind of weather prediction, If they did I think looking out your window would give a more accurate forecast! but then again I still find it hard to believe the reports that the uk MET office was doing this for an entire planet. lol

    • Mike Davis says:

      Sparks:
      Yes there are long range forecasters with an average of 80% or better for regional climate conditions. They provide trends by using the methods you describe. If the models used historical data and known past responses to external “Forcing” they would get better results than they do now. Historic accuracy in results and pattern matching is the key so with a greater accurate base they should be able to provide better and longer range forecasts. Currently the Homogenization technique they use destroys any value and the result is Garbage for model input. That brings up the climatologist Motto: GIGO as they seem to live by it!

      But HEY! It is a paycheck!

      • Mike Davis says:

        Some even believe their results!!!

      • Sparks says:

        I’ve been reading up on Co2 and going over the diagrams they have of the green house effect! and I keep running into conflicting arguments, I think someone has their physics wrong along the line.

        could you give me your opinion on this!
        Is external forcing the radiation coming into the atmosphere and internal forcing radiation being reflected from the surface back through the atmosphere? I know how the gas theoretically is supposed to have a masking effect but it must have a potential too, I mean Co2 in the atmosphere should only have the ability to absorb its own potential of radiation or a kind of saturation point?

        I understand the physics behind the science but I’m still unfamiliar with some of the climate terminology, some of the physics and explanations I’ve see about co2 are bizarre.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s