Posted On: Wednesday - February 28th 2024 2:20PM MST
In Topics: Global Climate Stupidity Science Big-Biz Stupidity
(More on the source of this image below.)
Yes, It's been a long time since Peak Stupidity broached this particular stupidity, other than politically. It's been longer since we discussed the basics of math modeling of the complex climate of the World. In the beginning days of this blog, we stated very clearly that "There is no working mathematical model of the world's climate, dammit!" in 5 short posts: Part 1 - - Part 2 - - Part 3 - - Part 4 and Part 5. We see no reason to change that stance 7 years later.
I don't have the time in the day to keep up with Anthony Watt's WattsUpWithThat blog. He gets into scientific details in the discussion of climate modeling and also refutes the Climate Calamity™ hype to the tune of 5-8 posts per day. Instapundit led me to a certain post, as the title goes along with what I've been writing, New Study: Climate Models Get Water Vapor Wildly Wrong – A ‘Major Gap in Our Understanding’.
I am not in the Climatology field. My point about this science from my technical background is simply that there are lots of physical processes that determine the climate, not all of them are known well enough to be modeled accurately as part of an overall model, and even were they, math models take a LONG TIME to get working right. I have no doubt that the "Greenhouse effect" is a factor, but it is not nearly the whole ball game. About the greenhouse gas water vapor, though, and models matching observation:
A new study published in PNAS has demonstrated, once again, that climate models fail to simulate what happens in the real world with regard to fundamental climate change variables like water vapor. This is a devastating finding, as water vapor is the most significant greenhouse gas due to its alleged “feedback” capacity, accelerating warming well beyond what CO2 is said to be capable of alone.Hey, no harm, no foul. This is science. You or your peers work to figure out WHY your model doesn't nearly match reality, and, if the discrepancy is determined, then you try to fix the model. So long as none of Simpson et al are Climate Alarmists screaming that the sky is falling, I respect them for doing Climatology. It sounds like fun... that's all.
The authors do not understate the significance of this climate modeling failure.
“This represents a major gap in our understanding and in climate model fidelity that must be understood and fixed as soon as possible in order to provide reliable hydroclimate projections for arid/semi-arid regions in the coming decades.”
Per state-of-the-art climate models, specific humidity (SH) should increase as a consequence of CO2-induced global warming. But 40 years of observations (1980-) show no increasing SH trend over arid/semi-arid regions.
Per state-of-the-art climate models, relative humidity (RH) should decline slightly as a consequence of CO2-induced global warming. But 40 years of observations (1980-) show not a slight declining trend, but a declining trend that is “about an order of magnitude more than the models on average.” In other words, the climate models are wrong by a factor of 10.
Unfortunately, rather than the advancement of Climate Science, the works-in-progress math models of the climate of the World have been used by Globalist fear-mongering control freaks to take over large parts of the world's economy. This post is just another "I told you so". There is NO working mathematical model of the World's Climate. If you pretend otherwise, you're a dupe or a liar.
PS: In some cases, I go to the link that's often attached to the "file photos" used here. This image came from ExxonMobile. 2024 Advancing Climate Solutions Report.
Advancing Climate Solutions Through Innovative Industrial Approaches. Read More. Read More On ExxonMobil's Ongoing Strategy In The 2024 Advancing Climate Solutions Report."Oh, spare us! Just go find new oil and gas, and cut the bullcrap. We know that's what it is, and little Greta will hate you just the same.
Comments:
Moderator
Thursday - February 29th 2024 8:17AM MST
PS: Oh, I'd completely forgotten Leap Day, Mr. Smith. Should there be a post? Maybe I'll get to it next time around... 4 years... in whatever country we are in.
Yeah, we had some major wind shift as a cold front came through. I have neighbors who have had these 2 bushes on each side of their walkway for years. They are in concrete planters too big to move. These neighbors take good care of them - they put cloth covers over them when it's going to be below freezing, but no heat source. (So, this is only good for small and short-duration drops below freezing. Keeps radiation heat transfer down, is all). Those 2 bushes died last or 2 winters ago, and then they died again this year.
What does that say about Climate Change? Al Gore never told us the bushes were gonna DIE!!
Yeah, we had some major wind shift as a cold front came through. I have neighbors who have had these 2 bushes on each side of their walkway for years. They are in concrete planters too big to move. These neighbors take good care of them - they put cloth covers over them when it's going to be below freezing, but no heat source. (So, this is only good for small and short-duration drops below freezing. Keeps radiation heat transfer down, is all). Those 2 bushes died last or 2 winters ago, and then they died again this year.
What does that say about Climate Change? Al Gore never told us the bushes were gonna DIE!!
Adam Smith
Thursday - February 29th 2024 7:23AM MST
PS: Good morning, Mr. Moderator, Dieter,
We had some pretty good climate change here in the North Georgia Hills yesterday. The day started out pretty nice then turned beautiful and sunny with a high around 71°. Then the wind picked up a bit and by 2:30 in the afternoon it was raining sideways. (I had to take the paintings down on the porch so they wouldn't blow off the wall!) By the time the rain stopped (around 4:30 pm) the temperature dropped to about 45°. By night fall I had to cover the aloe plants so they wouldn't frost.
I'm not sure how much rain we had as I haven't checked the rain-o-meter but it was probably about an inch.
And today? Nice and sunny again. Still a bit cold at 36° but it looks like it will warm up pretty well by this afternoon. The plants can go back outside today because there is no more freezing in the forecast. (low of 38° tonight?)
So much climate change. Anyway...
Happy Leap Day! ☮️
We had some pretty good climate change here in the North Georgia Hills yesterday. The day started out pretty nice then turned beautiful and sunny with a high around 71°. Then the wind picked up a bit and by 2:30 in the afternoon it was raining sideways. (I had to take the paintings down on the porch so they wouldn't blow off the wall!) By the time the rain stopped (around 4:30 pm) the temperature dropped to about 45°. By night fall I had to cover the aloe plants so they wouldn't frost.
I'm not sure how much rain we had as I haven't checked the rain-o-meter but it was probably about an inch.
And today? Nice and sunny again. Still a bit cold at 36° but it looks like it will warm up pretty well by this afternoon. The plants can go back outside today because there is no more freezing in the forecast. (low of 38° tonight?)
So much climate change. Anyway...
Happy Leap Day! ☮️
Moderator
Thursday - February 29th 2024 6:04AM MST
PS: Good afternoon (for you), Dieter. Unless you're in a department in which the Wokeness has gotten bad, yes, science should be fun. Gathering climate data, studying atmospheric, oceanic, or other phenomena that are parts of a climate model via experimentation and observation, then working on the finite-element/finite-difference math models that try to represent the physics, and running them to seeing the effects of these input processes... yeah, that's science.
Nobody should figure that this model is something that should be used even to make a better Farmer's Almanac, much less a prediction of differences in climate 10 years or 50 years hence, unless that model has been shown to WORK. That mean, one gets the output from the best model and compares it to observations for the ensuing years. I don't ask for "the change in average relative humidity in wintertime within 2 percentage points in Dieter Kief's home town near the Swiss border in '34". I don't ask for "the average high T's for the year '29 in the north Georgia hills within 1 C.".
How about just rough CORRECT forecasts for :snowfall amount changes (higher, lower, ~ the same) in N. America smoothed over 3 season periods for 10 years hence", or "Difference from now in average air temperature averaged over the Caribbean islands and sea to within a couple of tenths of a C", or again, "higher, lower, ~ the same)?
Would the latter be too much to ask? No, the whole thing is not easy. It's not happening right now, any model that's actually trustworthy. That's not at all to say the science isn't worth doing. The scientists need to quit being Carl Sagan wannabe's and shut their mouths when the ctrl-left alarmist journalists get with them on Zoom.
BTW, the latter paragraph leads me to just such an example. I should have foretold that in this post.
Nobody should figure that this model is something that should be used even to make a better Farmer's Almanac, much less a prediction of differences in climate 10 years or 50 years hence, unless that model has been shown to WORK. That mean, one gets the output from the best model and compares it to observations for the ensuing years. I don't ask for "the change in average relative humidity in wintertime within 2 percentage points in Dieter Kief's home town near the Swiss border in '34". I don't ask for "the average high T's for the year '29 in the north Georgia hills within 1 C.".
How about just rough CORRECT forecasts for :snowfall amount changes (higher, lower, ~ the same) in N. America smoothed over 3 season periods for 10 years hence", or "Difference from now in average air temperature averaged over the Caribbean islands and sea to within a couple of tenths of a C", or again, "higher, lower, ~ the same)?
Would the latter be too much to ask? No, the whole thing is not easy. It's not happening right now, any model that's actually trustworthy. That's not at all to say the science isn't worth doing. The scientists need to quit being Carl Sagan wannabe's and shut their mouths when the ctrl-left alarmist journalists get with them on Zoom.
BTW, the latter paragraph leads me to just such an example. I should have foretold that in this post.
Dieter Kief
Thursday - February 29th 2024 1:10AM MST
PS
Millions of scientists all over the world agree:
It's better if we run this show than - thee
__________________________________________________
This is a multi-faaceted story and one of its facets is
exactly this: Institutionalized science as a trillion
dollar/eurpo/yen/remnimbi institution is looking at its own well being first. -
That means: Them scientists ALL** like it, if science does this hypothesis- corrections - hypothesis game, because that is what science does - and they like doing it: These laboratories/conferences/universities are their castles/ subsidiaries.
**this too is a very old story.There are always heretics - for lots of reasons. But since this IS a very old story, we quite clearly know what happens to them: They face lots of troubles (and some of them- - - - occasioonally - rise to fame - - : - - Post mortem, as we old humanists - with a little mild smile at times - don't forget to - - add.
Millions of scientists all over the world agree:
It's better if we run this show than - thee
__________________________________________________
This is a multi-faaceted story and one of its facets is
exactly this: Institutionalized science as a trillion
dollar/eurpo/yen/remnimbi institution is looking at its own well being first. -
That means: Them scientists ALL** like it, if science does this hypothesis- corrections - hypothesis game, because that is what science does - and they like doing it: These laboratories/conferences/universities are their castles/ subsidiaries.
**this too is a very old story.There are always heretics - for lots of reasons. But since this IS a very old story, we quite clearly know what happens to them: They face lots of troubles (and some of them- - - - occasioonally - rise to fame - - : - - Post mortem, as we old humanists - with a little mild smile at times - don't forget to - - add.
Yeah, it's been pretty cold for a short spell each of the past two winters. Last year was worse. It got down to 0° and stayed cold long enough to kill my giant rosemary plant. This year it got down into the lower single digits, but the cold didn't last as long. My three, new, young rosemary plants all survived.
Instead of bringing the aloe plants in this winter (as I have done in previous winters) I left them out and relied on covering them when it got cold. (They're next to the house and mostly out of the wind.) I do have some seedling warming mats that I put around the base of the pots. Even when it got really cold they did alright.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/173665485506
(Seedling warming mats.)
When it was cold I left the aloe covered for probably about a week or so. Baby girl decided to make a sitting spot on top of them, and so the plant that was in the middle of the bunch got smashed down pretty well. That's ok though, they did better than hiding in the house all winter and I'm sure they will come back this summer.
Al Gore is a charlatan and a hypocrite. Maybe if we had a bit more CO2 in the atmosphere your neighbor's plants would have survived?
Cheers! ☮️