mead cohen berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn
Model Mayhem
Scientists Befuddled by El Niño’s Absence
Features Icon
show comments
  • Corlyss

    The climate junk science crowd’s models have been unable to predict even known events. Their models and their data are no damn good but they dare not concede it.

  • William Wilson

    “…the fact that surface temperatures are gradually rising, that they’re
    doing so in part because of increased greenhouse gas emissions…”

    Umm, actually no. It’s not a fact. It’s not even demonstrable. There hasn’t been a rise in global temps for 18 years and 3 months (and counting), now being called the “great pause”. The great hoax is more like it. Then there is that pesky Arctic sea ice at record levels. Ditto Antarctica. The oceans haven’t risen, either.

    This has zero to do with climate and everything to do with wealth redistribution and global governance.

    For the straight dope, go to A great clearinghouse for information.

  • 57nomad

    Will you PLEASE try to show some cultural sensitivity?? It’s taking a siesta!

    • Curious Mayhem

      El Niño is sleeping — never wake a sleeping baby.

  • zombietimeshare

    “One thing that stands out on this [El Nino/Southern Oscillation] is how wrong the models were in predicting a major event in 2014,’’ said Matt Rogers

    If the computer models say it is happening then reality must be wrong.

  • EPatrickMosman

    When it comes to climate change ,nee global warming, it would have been more correct to cite Donald Rumsfeld’s “Unkown unkowns” rather than “there remain plenty of “known unknowns.” since none of the models used today with their man-made assumptions, man-made computer programs, man-made algorithms, man-made temperature corrections are able to predict even the short term weather events never mind years into the future.

  • FriendlyGoat

    TAI either believes the last sentence of the fourth paragraph, or it doesn’t.

  • Joseph Smith

    No, you have it wrong. The problem isn’t the known unknowns. You can at least try to take those into account. Its the unknown unknowns that get you . There is no way to take those into account. And that pretty well seems to sum up much of the state of the climate computer models.

  • stanbrown

    “climate is a highly nonlinear chaotic system. Worse, chaos was discovered by Lorenz [Edward Norton Lorenz] in the very first computational climate models. Chaos, right down to apparent period doubling, is clearly visible (IMO) in the 5 million year
    climate record. Chaotic systems, in a chaotic regime, are nearly uncomputable even for very, simple, toy problems — that is the essence
    of Lorenz’s discovery as his first weather model was crude in the extreme, little more than a toy. What nobody is acknowledging is that
    current climate models, for all of their computational complexity and enormous size and expense, are still no more than toys, countless orders of magnitude away from the integration scale where we might have some reasonable hope of success. They are being used with gay abandon to generate countless climate trajectories, none of which particularly resemble the climate, and then they are averaged in ways that are an absolute statistical obscenity as if the linearized average of a Feigenbaum tree of chaotic behavior is somehow a good predictor of the behavior of a chaotic system!

    This isn’t just dumb, it is beyond dumb. It is literally betraying the roots of the entire discipline for manna.”

    Duke physicist R. G. Brown

    • Curious Mayhem

      The American Interest: Befuddled by the Chaos That is Our Climate.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2016 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service