3 ms·

> Because it turns people off to much. No, that's not what she said at all! Her main point was that the "hot models" were not being considered as very reliable

by brabel 3y ago

> Because it turns people off to much. No, that's not what she said at all! Her main point was that the "hot models" were not being considered as very reliable because they showed poor power predicting past climate when compared to other models, but when applied to predicting the weather within shorter periods (e.g. a few days) they were actually better, so that gives weight to the hypothesis that the "hot models" are actually more accurate than previously thought, so they may need to adjust the currently accepted rates of warming to be higher... scientists didn't downplay the "hot models" because they were trying to make people more comfortable - that would be doing terrible science! Science doesn't care about feelings.

FrustratedMonky 3y ago
You are correct. I was referring to start of the video when referring to the reporting bodies that aggregate the model data. Of course science doesn't have 'feelings' but the people that report it do. And, you can take the same words' and some people call it 'hype' and others call it 'downplayed'. Maybe I shouldn't have said 'scientist'. Scientist have 100's of studies, and create 100's of models. The results are a range. Then various agencies release 'reports' that are summaries of the models. But, like in a lot of fields, you can toss outliers like the top 5 extremes hot and cold. And of course, it's a report, so the language can be as 'toned down', or 'hyped' as you want to make it, or judge it. I'm sure if it was over-hyped, many would complain that way too. What this video was then explaining, was that some of the 'hot' models might actually have been more accurate. So the entire report is even more skewed 'cold', the emergency is actually greater. You are correct. The Video was all about the 'hot' models and how they might actually be the most correct. Thus the reports are skewed in wrong direction overall.

by brabel 3y ago

FrustratedMonky 3y ago

You are correct. I was referring to start of the video when referring to the reporting bodies that aggregate the model data. Of course science doesn't have 'feelings' but the people that report it do. And, you can take the same words' and some people call it 'hype' and others call it 'downplayed'. Maybe I shouldn't have said 'scientist'. Scientist have 100's of studies, and create 100's of models. The results are a range. Then various agencies release 'reports' that are summaries of the models. But, like in a lot of fields, you can toss outliers like the top 5 extremes hot and cold. And of course, it's a report, so the language can be as 'toned down', or 'hyped' as you want to make it, or judge it. I'm sure if it was over-hyped, many would complain that way too. What this video was then explaining, was that some of the 'hot' models might actually have been more accurate. So the entire report is even more skewed 'cold', the emergency is actually greater. You are correct. The Video was all about the 'hot' models and how they might actually be the most correct. Thus the reports are skewed in wrong direction overall.