3 ms·
> Do you think this is the case here? No reason to believe these models are different ( it is not about the models, it is about the people building them ). >
by the-dude 5y ago
> Do you think this is the case here?
No reason to believe these models are different ( it is not about the models, it is about the people building them ).
> that is not based on what actually happens?
That is not what I said. These models are used to say things about the future, so by definition they are an assumption about what actually happens.
I will try to explain my point by a fictitious example :
Researcher A is building model for global temperature supposedly correlated with compound X. Model shows that within 100 yrs the temperature will plateua and then drop off to pre-industrial levels.
The model will be considered faulty and will be tweaked until it does feel comfortable : that is, aligns with one's assumptions.
Models are crystalizations of one's assumptions, there is no truth.
- cinntaile 5y agoOf course you use the intuition of experts within that field when building models, that's a given. I don't see what is wrong with that, that's how all models are built. But what is it that you're trying to say about climate models? State your own assumptions please, I don't want to keep playing this guessing game.