5 ms·
It would a stretch to equate the current state of climate science with the current state of physics in terms of the reliability of its' predictive models.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
It would a stretch to equate the current state of climate science with the current state of physics in terms of the reliability of its' predictive models.
- snowwrestler 13y agoThis creates a false dichotomy between climate science and physics. Researchers studying the climate use physical models to do so. And their accuracy is not bad--100 years ago they predicted that burning fossil fuels would warm the climate, and that matches what we measure today. The precision is low, though. That is a result of the chaos created by the immense complexity of the systems involved. We can't predict the precise path of an individual electron through a bar of copper either.
- flagnog 13y agowe know the climate goes through cycles, so either it was going to get warmer or colder. In this instance, they guessed right. However, their models don't seem to include the 'pause' seen in global warming over the past (what, 19 years?). Seeing that we had just finished a period of relative cooling (Maunder Minimum), I find little in their prediction that encourages me to believe their hypothesis. And it is just a hypothesis.
- cashmonkey85 13y agoI know people that denie carbon dioxide traps heat and wish that basic science is a conspiracy.