/sci/ - Science & Math

>>16238368

>>16205885
Heres a document on atmospheric modeling that might help you understand

>>16189440

>>16167557
>Climate modelling is an inherently unscientific endeavour because the models are unfalsifiable in our lifetimes.
Thats not the only unscientific thing about them

>>16065698

>>16014675

this pdf spells it out pretty well

>>15945967

>>15937526

>>15805046
some information about their models has become public

>>15769759

>>15758724

>>15666672

>>15581634
There is none, global warming is fake

>441,668 lines of antiquated FORTRAN

>There is code to calculate the albedo of the sea ice, but sometimes that code comes up with unrealistic output. Rather than figuring out why, and then fixing the problem, the NASA team are just replacing the bad value with the corresponding maximum or minimum values. Science at its finest!

>Code Block B shows a comment in describing another bit of melt-pond fun.
C**** safety valve to ensure that melt ponds eventually disappear (Ti<-10) if (Ti1 .lt.-10.) pond_melt(i,j)=0. ! refreeze
>In plain English, it is saying that if the temperature is less than −10°C, and the polynya hasn’t refrozen, make it refreeze. Without this bit of code, some of the melt ponds might never refreeze, no matter how cold it got...you have to love that kind of physics – water that doesn’t freeze! This is what the climate modellers mean when they say that their model is ‘physics-based’. They use the term in the same way Hollywood producers do when they say a movie is ‘based on a true story’.

>All a computer model can do is make visible and glorify the under- and, more importantly, the misunderstandings of the programmers. If you write a model under the belief that CO2 controls the temperature...guess what you’ll get?

>As the scholar of semantics Alfred Korzybski famously said, ‘the map is not the territory’. He used the phrase to poetically express the idea that people often confuse models of reality with reality itself. Climate modellers have this problem in spades, far too often discussing their results as if they were real-world facts

>Iterative models are not to be trusted. Ever. Yes, modern airplanes are designed using iterative models...but the designers still use wind tunnels to test the results. Unfortunately, we have nothing that corresponds to a ‘wind tunnel’ for the climate.