4 ms·
While there is probably a legitimate fear that others will use her evidence to claim that , I see her as making a more limited claim in this piece: current GCM
by nkurz 10y ago
While there is probably a legitimate fear that others will use her evidence to claim that , I see her as making a more limited claim in this piece: current GCM's cannot reliably be used to make definitive claims about climate a century out, and therefore should not be relied on for policy decisions unless their true uncertainty (model risk) is accounted for. Which quotes from this piece do you read as a "call to inaction"?
That said, it's true that she does write elsewhere about her belief that uncertainty does not necessarily increase the urgency of action: https://judithcurry.com/2016/01/05/climate-models-and-precautionary-measures/ https://judithcurry.com/2016/01/05/climate-models-and-precau.... I haven't read many of the linked posts, but it would seem fair to summarize her position as something like "we don't yet have sufficient understanding of the problem to justify taking actions that will cause definite harm".
- xapata 10y agoIf "definite harm" includes moderate financial cost, that's a disastrous policy.