9 ms·

As a layman, can you explain to me why a very accurate (i.e. small error) model wouldn't still lead to catastrophically incorrect results when projected across

• jeffbee 5y ago
  There's a difference between a fairly simple linear model of the climate and trying to guess whether the initial conditions of an unstable disease propagation model are < 1.0 or > 1.0. Think of climate modeling as saying that for a given species of trees, half of them will be dead at a given latitude in 50-100 years, not pointing at a specific tree and predicting that it will die on July 7th, 2047.
• jbay808 5y ago
  What do you consider to be catastrophically incorrect? If the model predicts that a glacier disappears in 2050 and it disappears in 2070 instead? Or if the lack-of-model makes a lack-of-prediction about glacier disappearance, and then it disappears in 2070 by surprise? Error accumulation makes sense to worry about if you're planning a voyage and worried that dead-reckoning navigation will leave you kilometres off course. But if you're on the voyage already, out on the open ocean, you can argue with the navigator's math but you still need to navigate -- you won't do better by just blindly insisting the boat never left the harbour.