AGW and Model Failures- An Engineers Point of View....

[Billy_Bob]

AGW and Model Failures- An Engineers Point of View....

This is a post at WUWT and the engineer who made it is spot on. As I have been critiquing modeling in general lately he hits every point dead on.

Most of engineering is to design things so that small unpredictable effects are swamped by large predictable ones. Any stable design has to work like that. If it doesn’t, it ain’t stable. Or reproducible.

That leads to a direct piece of engineering wisdom: If a system is not dominated by a few major feedback factors, it ain’t stable. And if it has a regions of stability then perturbing it outside those regions will result in gross instability, and the system will be short lived.

Climate has been in real terms amazingly stable. For millions of years. It has maintained an average of about 282 degrees absolute +- about 5 degrees since forever.

This article is an excellent read. The math may be over many peoples heads here but the principals he lays out are easily followed by even the basic scientist in everyone.

AGW is one of the great dangers facing mankind, not because its true, but because it is widely believed, and demonstrably false.

My analysis of convenient lies shows that they are most dangerous in times of deep social and economic change in society, when the old orthodoxies are simply no good.

I feel more scared these days than at any time in the cold war. Then one felt that no one would be stupid enough to start world war three. Today, I no longer have that conviction. Two generations of social engineering aimed at removing all risk and all need to actually think from society has led to a generation which is stupid enough and smug enough and feels safe enough to utterly destroy western civilization simply because they take it totally for granted. To them the promotion of the AGW meme is a success story in terms of political and commercial marketing. The fact that where they are taking us over a cliff edge into a new dark age, is something they simply haven’t considered at all.

His take on CO2 being the smoke and mirrors to keep people from asking the more correct questions is refreshing.

 

[Old Rocks]

LOL. Another fruitloop non-scientist. No, I will not bother or waste my time reading anything out of WUWT.

 

[mamooth]

The engineers writing on climate sicence are almost always crippled by tunnel-vision. They assume that their own specialty must apply to every single thing in the universe. That guy tried to apply his own knowledge of electronic feedback loops to climate systems, and came up with something like StarTrek technobabble. It was a word salad that meant nothing sensible, being he didn't understand the basic concepts. And then it got worse. Read to the end, and he goes off into full-scale conspiracy ranting.

Good climate scientists have to be generalists, and they have to know statistics inside and out. Engineers rarely have either skill. The craziest deniers tend to have the words "retired engineer" by their name.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

LOL. Another fruitloop non-scientist. No, I will not bother or waste my time reading anything out of WUWT.

Translation: we got nothing but our FAITH in the CO2 molecule

 

[HenryBHough]

Once the left has mastered collecting unicorn farts the would will never need ANY fossil fuels. They just need twenty or thirty trillion of your tax dollars more to find their first test unicorn!

 

[Billy_Bob]

LOL. Another fruitloop non-scientist. No, I will not bother or waste my time reading anything out of WUWT.

Old Crock shows his usual lack of understanding and throws and adhomenim Bomb.. Usual denier drivel from the science denier.

 

[RKMBrown]

The engineers writing on climate sicence are almost always crippled by tunnel-vision. They assume that their own specialty must apply to every single thing in the universe. That guy tried to apply his own knowledge of electronic feedback loops to climate systems, and came up with something like StarTrek technobabble. It was a word salad that meant nothing sensible, being he didn't understand the basic concepts. And then it got worse. Read to the end, and he goes off into full-scale conspiracy ranting.

Good climate scientists have to be generalists, and they have to know statistics inside and out. Engineers rarely have either skill. The craziest deniers tend to have the words "retired engineer" by their name.

ROFL what a fucking moron you are.

 

[Old Rocks]

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

From the American Institute of Physics, not whackadoodle conspiracy buffs.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The engineers writing on climate sicence are almost always crippled by tunnel-vision. They assume that their own specialty must apply to every single thing in the universe. That guy tried to apply his own knowledge of electronic feedback loops to climate systems, and came up with something like StarTrek technobabble. It was a word salad that meant nothing sensible, being he didn't understand the basic concepts. And then it got worse. Read to the end, and he goes off into full-scale conspiracy ranting.

Good climate scientists have to be generalists, and they have to know statistics inside and out. Engineers rarely have either skill. The craziest deniers tend to have the words "retired engineer" by their name.

Translation: we have our flawed models and FAITH in CO2

 

[Old Rocks]

The engineers writing on climate sicence are almost always crippled by tunnel-vision. They assume that their own specialty must apply to every single thing in the universe. That guy tried to apply his own knowledge of electronic feedback loops to climate systems, and came up with something like StarTrek technobabble. It was a word salad that meant nothing sensible, being he didn't understand the basic concepts. And then it got worse. Read to the end, and he goes off into full-scale conspiracy ranting.

Good climate scientists have to be generalists, and they have to know statistics inside and out. Engineers rarely have either skill. The craziest deniers tend to have the words "retired engineer" by their name.

ROFL what a fucking moron you are.

Silly asshole, have you nothing at all to say, other than 'moron'? Probably not, that would require a bit of thought.

 

[Billy_Bob]

LOL. Another fruitloop non-scientist. No, I will not bother or waste my time reading anything out of WUWT.

Translation: we got nothing but our FAITH in the CO2 molecule

The math presented and the system descriptions make it easily followed. Some of the comments get into the brass tacks of it all showing how water vapor trumps the mighty CO2 Monster...

 

[RKMBrown]

LOL. Another fruitloop non-scientist. No, I will not bother or waste my time reading anything out of WUWT.

Translation: we got nothing but our FAITH in the CO2 molecule

The math presented and the system descriptions make it easily followed. Some of the comments get into the brass tacks of it all showing how water vapor trumps the mighty CO2 Monster...

Ayup.. imagine that, the vast majority of the atmosphere trumps the minuscule portion affected by CO2. The CO2 FUD is nothing but vapor.

 

[RKMBrown]

The engineers writing on climate sicence are almost always crippled by tunnel-vision. They assume that their own specialty must apply to every single thing in the universe. That guy tried to apply his own knowledge of electronic feedback loops to climate systems, and came up with something like StarTrek technobabble. It was a word salad that meant nothing sensible, being he didn't understand the basic concepts. And then it got worse. Read to the end, and he goes off into full-scale conspiracy ranting.

Good climate scientists have to be generalists, and they have to know statistics inside and out. Engineers rarely have either skill. The craziest deniers tend to have the words "retired engineer" by their name.

ROFL what a fucking moron you are.

Silly asshole, have you nothing at all to say, other than 'moron'? Probably not, that would require a bit of thought.

We've had this EFFING SAME CONVERSATION 5000 TIMES YA MORON. Has your view on this topic changed? Or did you forget the other 4999 times we discussed it?

 

[Old Rocks]

Why the hell is it that every goober that comes on here thinking they know more than scientists immediatly seize on the fact that water vapor is the primary GHG? Do they really think that the scientists don't know this? And do you know why water vapor is not considered the primary problem? It has an average lifespan in the atmosphere of less than 10 days. Then it comes out as rain. If you completely dried out the atmosphere, it would immediatly take up water from the ocean. If you created an atmosphere with 100% humidity, in less than 10 days, it would be back to normal humidity.

The increase in CO2 in the atmosphere will be with us for hundreds, in not thousands, of years. And the warming of the atmosphere from CO2 will evaporate more water, creating more water vapor in the atmosphere, and creating a feedback making the atmosphere much warmer than the CO2 would do by itself.

 

[Billy_Bob]

LOL. Another fruitloop non-scientist. No, I will not bother or waste my time reading anything out of WUWT.

Translation: we got nothing but our FAITH in the CO2 molecule

The math presented and the system descriptions make it easily followed. Some of the comments get into the brass tacks of it all showing how water vapor trumps the mighty CO2 Monster...

Ayup.. imagine that, the vast majority of the atmosphere trumps the minuscule portion affected by CO2. The CO2 FUD is nothing but vapor.

Current modeling only includes POSITIVE FEEDBACKS. This is why they fail every time. There must be negative feedback for any oscillation to be stable. Since these idiots dont believe in negative feedbacks their models runaway...

 

[Crick]

My analysis of convenient lies shows that they are most dangerous in times of deep social and economic change in society, when the old orthodoxies are simply no good.

Does that sound like an engineering analysis to anyone here?

 

[Old Rocks]

The engineers writing on climate sicence are almost always crippled by tunnel-vision. They assume that their own specialty must apply to every single thing in the universe. That guy tried to apply his own knowledge of electronic feedback loops to climate systems, and came up with something like StarTrek technobabble. It was a word salad that meant nothing sensible, being he didn't understand the basic concepts. And then it got worse. Read to the end, and he goes off into full-scale conspiracy ranting.

Good climate scientists have to be generalists, and they have to know statistics inside and out. Engineers rarely have either skill. The craziest deniers tend to have the words "retired engineer" by their name.

ROFL what a fucking moron you are.

Silly asshole, have you nothing at all to say, other than 'moron'? Probably not, that would require a bit of thought.

We've had this EFFING SAME CONVERSATION 5000 TIMES YA MORON. Has your view on this topic changed? Or did you forget the other 4999 times we discussed it?

And for the 5001st time, I will state that you are an ignoramous with zero knowledge of the science, and a willing liar for the energy companies.

 

[Crick]

Current modeling only includes POSITIVE FEEDBACKS. This is why they fail every time. There must be negative feedback for any oscillation to be stable. Since these idiots dont believe in negative feedbacks their models runaway...

That is complete and utter nonsense. Let's see some evidence supporting that claim Billy Bob. Prove for us that NO GCM takes albedo from cloud cover, mineral dust, sulfate and nitrate aerosols or land use changes into account. Prove for us that NO GCM includes terms for Le Chatelier shifts in the carbon cycle, for weathering effects, for increase agricultural productivity, for negative lapse rate feedback or increased blackbody radiation.

 

[Old Rocks]

LOL. Another fruitloop non-scientist. No, I will not bother or waste my time reading anything out of WUWT.

Translation: we got nothing but our FAITH in the CO2 molecule

The math presented and the system descriptions make it easily followed. Some of the comments get into the brass tacks of it all showing how water vapor trumps the mighty CO2 Monster...

Ayup.. imagine that, the vast majority of the atmosphere trumps the minuscule portion affected by CO2. The CO2 FUD is nothing but vapor.

Current modeling only includes POSITIVE FEEDBACKS. This is why they fail every time. There must be negative feedback for any oscillation to be stable. Since these idiots dont believe in negative feedbacks their models runaway...

Dumb fuck, the models predicted Arctic Ice might be gone briefly in the summer by 2100. By observation, it appears that this will happen by 2030. Possibly much sooner.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Why the hell is it that every goober that comes on here thinking they know more than scientists immediatly seize on the fact that water vapor is the primary GHG? Do they really think that the scientists don't know this? And do you know why water vapor is not considered the primary problem? It has an average lifespan in the atmosphere of less than 10 days. Then it comes out as rain. If you completely dried out the atmosphere, it would immediatly take up water from the ocean. If you created an atmosphere with 100% humidity, in less than 10 days, it would be back to normal humidity.

The increase in CO2 in the atmosphere will be with us for hundreds, in not thousands, of years. And the warming of the atmosphere from CO2 will evaporate more water, creating more water vapor in the atmosphere, and creating a feedback making the atmosphere much warmer than the CO2 would do by itself.

Bull Shit!

Atmospheric CO2 has half life of just 7 years. Recent studies show the C13 molecule dating to be flawed by a factor of over 100.

The last 18 years 3 months have see no warming on earth. Yet the CO2 rise continues unabated. There IS no corresponding rise of temp.

Prior to this pause natural variation is responsible for 100% of all warming by empirical evidence.