3 ms·
> Looks like this part is political: “for the physical modelling of Earth’s climate, quantifying variability and reliably predicting global warming” All this
by eganist 5y ago
> Looks like this part is political: “for the physical modelling of Earth’s climate, quantifying variability and reliably predicting global warming”
All this is saying is that the predictive models they devised were proven correct given climate behavior today, e.g rise of temperatures and a general uptrend in severe weather activity that followed.
- fighterpilot 5y agoHe predicted 0.57C of warming by the year 2000, and we saw 0.54C of warming. So accurate at least according to that. https://twitter.com/hausfath/status/1445359093905084417 https://twitter.com/hausfath/status/1445359093905084417
- Throwaway197401 5y agoWhich shouldn't be given a nobel price unless they can explain exactly why which they can't just like we can't really explain why the temperature didn't increase for a period after 2nd world war without getting into speculation. It's bogus and as far some anything related to scientific standards as we can come.