16 ms·
> no climate models for the state of the climate that we’re living in right now That was the overall impression I got from the article: model after model predi
by cratermoon 3y ago
> no climate models for the state of the climate that we’re living in right now
That was the overall impression I got from the article: model after model predicted unremarkable intensification, and they were consistently wrong.
Out models are only as good as the input parameters, all of which are based on data from a past that no longer applies. Is there a way to apply climate change modelling to short-term weather modelling? Change the forecasting from "we expect such-and-such to happen because that's the most common case over the past 50 years" to something like "in the past we'd expect such-and-such to happen but including more recent work we expect a different thing"?
- Applejinx 3y agoYes. And they'll be doing just that. They couldn't even be modeling this without modeling chaotic systems: their models are chaotic systems too. With another model, the Otis event MIGHT have appeared, or might have appeared one run in a hundred. With their current modeling, the Otis event might have appeared in their model one in a thousand runs, or one in ten thousand, depending on if they're accurately capturing the energy state of the system. They might've discarded it if it came up, as a glitch. When real life glitches you don't get to re-run the model for more optimistic results.