“Given our level of ignorance about what’s going on, we don’t want to compound that with a level of arrogance by saying we know what’s going to happen in a month,”
– Jonathan Martin
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Mission Accomplished
- Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- “pushing nature past its limits”
- Compassion For Terrorists
- Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- Maldives Underwater By 2050
- Woke Grok
- Grok Explains Gender
- Humans Like Warmer Climates
- Homophobic Greenhouse Gases
- Grok Explains The Effects Of CO2
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2027
- Red Hot Australia
- EPA : 17.5 Degrees Warming By 2050
- “Winter temperatures colder than last ice age
- Big Oil Saved The Whales
- Guardian 100% Inheritance Tax
- Kerry, Blinken, Hillary And Jefferson
- “Climate Change Indicators: Heat Waves”
- Combating Bad Weather With Green Energy
- Flooding Mar-a-Lago
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2020
- Colorless, Odorless CO2
Recent Comments
- conrad ziefle on Mission Accomplished
- conrad ziefle on Mission Accomplished
- Billyjack on Mission Accomplished
- conrad ziefle on Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- conrad ziefle on “pushing nature past its limits”
- conrad ziefle on Mission Accomplished
- John Francis on Mission Accomplished
- Mike on Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- Timo, not that one! on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Bill on Ice-Free Arctic By 2027
I wonder what he would say about the climate over a number of years. After all, predicting long term averages is a completely other business than predicting the weather in, say, a month.
He wasn’t even too keen on predicting what will happen in a year.
Why not ask him then.
It is easy to predict long term patterns if long term patterns are evident in historical records you just need to average out the observed variations and project those into the future. Care should be taken to use the longest period available of historic records and searching for ALL available patterns. It would probably be easier to do this on a regional rather than global basis as different regions follow different patterns.
That is ONE of the evident problems with Climate models being used today.
Precting the future climate is infinitely more difficult than predicting the weather in a month.
The average of erroneous data is still erroneous data. If someone uses a computer model to predict global daily temperatures for the next thirty years (the arbitrarily defined time period of “climate”) and then claims that the average of this data is a more accurate predictor of what mean global temperatures over the period will be than the daily predictions of temperature are for each day of the period, then they are utterly crazy. If the idiotic notion that “the errors tend to cancel each other out over time” were true, then it would follow that a weekly mean temperature prediction would tend to be more accurate than a daily prediction, monthly more accurate than weekly, yearly more accurate than monthly, and so on. This is a statistically testable proposition, both in theory and in practice. We don’t have to wait 30 years or longer to see if the climate modelers’ claims are true, they can, if they are right, show us right now that their models’ predictive powers improve progressively with time. So why don’t they?
When talking about Long Term, I am talking about Thousands of years and even hundreds of thousands of years. Thirty years is regional weather and only a portion of a pattern. You can not build a house using the pattern for a door or window and that is about what the current modelers are trying to do. They do not even get that correct because they are patterning their door from hanging beads. and their window from the curtains.
Good analogy Mike…..
@Mike Davi
I was actually addressing our self-described “Sense Seeker”. I’m not quite sure what your comment is relevant to here, so, at the moment, I have nothing to say about it.
Sorry, that should obviously be “Mike Davis”.
Steven:
Forecasting:
http://www.forecastingprinciples.com/
Mike,
Thanks for the link – I had forgotten about that site and it’s a good one.