4 ms·
We can't predict the weather for 1 day ahead and now these clowns think they can predict something as complex as Earth for 100 years in the future lol. It can
by oifjsidjf 4y ago
We can't predict the weather for 1 day ahead and now these clowns think they can predict something as complex as Earth for 100 years in the future lol.
It can NEVER be done, it's not a question of computing power: it's sheer academic and scientific ignorance: it's IMPOSSIBLE to predict such a complex system.
If the Sun eg has a cycle which causes a significant cooling and warming: can they predict that? Obviously not. And yet such an event can change global warming/cooling direction completely.
The naivety of these scientists who model future events of horrible.
And then politicians and the masses belive them.
Go and look eg at their COVID predictions to see how wrong they were.
Funny how they aren't being that loud now when their "great supercomputer models" can be seen to be BS.
The point is that such large scale models CANNOT be made, it's physical impossible.
And no, you can NOT just take an "average" because a complex system can move in such a unpredictable way all of the sudden that the "average" would also completely change in an extreme fasion (if such a system can even be said to have an "average").
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- shanebellone 4y ago“We can then assess adaptation to different climate scenarios and interlink with other factors to predict a pattern of coextinctions.” “By running many simulations over three main scenarios of climate until 2050 and 2100 — the so-called Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP) from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), we show that there will be up to 34% more co-extinctions overall by 2100 than are predicted from direct effects alone,” Dr. Strona says.
- oifjsidjf 4y agoWhat's your point? Nothing that you wrote makes those simulations correct. >>.. interlink with other factors to predict a pattern of coextinctions.. How do they know these links are correct? They do not, and can not. >> By running many simulations ... So they themselves admit that they don't know which simulation is correct, or in other words, they silently admit they have no idea. So if they compute 1000 different scenarios then: a) How do they know any of those is correct? b) If you have 1k scenarios to choose from how do you know which one is correct? You cannot. >> ... over three main scenarios ... How do they know there will be only 3? Cannot know that. Nothing guarantuess that these 3 will happen, uncompultable. >> we show that there will be up to 34% more co-extinctions.. Imagine being so naive you actualy state it to a 1% accuracy lmao.
- shanebellone 4y agoSuggested reading material: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidence_interval https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidence_interval https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Validity_(statistics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Validity_(statistics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics
- oifjsidjf 4y agoYou think you're being clever but you don't get it: it's NOT POSSIBLE to predict complex system for such long times in advance because they "explode"/diverge way too much so no amount of "validity" or "confidence intervals" help you because you do NOT KNOW HOW MUCH THEY WILL DIVERGE: and THEY WILL. You can't even predict a double pendulum after a second or two: nature is trillions of double pendulums in a chain: you must be delusional to think you can predict that!
- shanebellone 4y agoGo back to Reddit.
- oifjsidjf 4y agoWhen one can't present a counter argument, this is I guess the only reply they are left with :)
- quags 4y agoI get the sentiment - somewhat. However , protecting resources like water, considering the affects of impacts from carbon , and waste management - plus a look at past environmental disasters I can’t see how anyone looks at our current situation and says let’s live for today and worry about tomorrow when the time comes is a appropriate response.
- oifjsidjf 4y agoProtecting stuff vs predicting something that you cannot predict are two completely different things.