Contact   Imprint   Advertising   Guidelines

climate change / unpredictable weather/wind

Forum for snow- and landkiters
foilholio
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 3429
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 3:20 am
Local Beach: Ventura Beach
Favorite Beaches: Tarifa
Style: Airstyle
Gear: Foils
Brand Affiliation: None
Has thanked: 227 times
Been thanked: 148 times

Re: climate change / unpredictable weather/wind

Postby foilholio » Mon Feb 10, 2020 5:23 pm

I wonder what it feels like to be Al Gore.

Matteo V
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: climate change / unpredictable weather/wind

Postby Matteo V » Mon Feb 10, 2020 5:44 pm

Trent hink wrote:
Mon Feb 10, 2020 2:45 am
In case there is any confusion about the conversation which has only just taken place, let me make it perfectly clear.

I described what scientific modeling is. Modeling is a tool used to help understand complex systems. That it can be sometimes be used to make predictions is only a secondary benefit and not the primary aim.

Matteo used his infallible logic to prove me wrong, and proceeded to say what scientific modeling is really all about, based on knowledge and facts he apparently just made up as he went.
In order to test the value (accuracy) of any model created, you check it against observations. If it does not match observations, then the model is flawed and unreliable in predicting outcomes.

If you wish to assert that I am incorrect in the above statement please don't just say that I am "a stupid doo doo head" making things up as I go. Instead, tell us what is wrong with the above statement.






Trent hink wrote:
Mon Feb 10, 2020 2:45 am
I told Mateo he was full of bs, and explained that I had actually studied scientific modeling in university. I then asked him to submit whatever credentials he might have that might prove he is not just making things up.

I then pointed out the logical fallacy in his own argument with the following statement:
Trent hink wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 11:58 pm
Matteo, please use your vast knowledge on this subject and apply it to the value of the "spaghetti models" used to predict hurricane paths.

Do you know that each line in the prediction comes from a separate model? None of the models ever precisely predict the storm's actual path, so by your logic these models are worthless and should all be thrown out.
I am still awaiting a reply, but I am happy to hear anyone else's assessment of the simple facts just recently posted here in this thread.
I appreciate your patience in waiting for my reply.

First off, your argument does not rest on whether you had 2 semesters or just one, in climate modeling. Education does not make a lie the truth. Your argument stands on its own, independent of how educated or uneducated (don't you only have one semester?) you are. Remember, if a parrot squawks "the sky is blue", it is still a true statement regardless of whether or not that parrot has ever seen the sky.

Second, I am absolutely positive you have answered and corrected yourself in your above statement. You just need to think for yourself a little bit. But let me give you a good start:

Of all of the storm tracks which are predicted by different models, what happens as you start to project further out in time? Does the model (or ensemble) get more accurate, or less accurate? How about predicting the 30 day storm track? How about predicting a 6-month storm track? Now I know this is going to somewhat anger you, but I think that by screaming that there is no 6-month storm track, you may start to understand the reality of modeling capabilities with so many variables known, so many known unknown variables, and potentially incomprehensibly large numbers of unknown unknown variables. But time is the one thing that stops you from even contemplating unknown unknowns.

Now if you've come this far, maybe you can go a little further. What is our capability of predicting the number of storms in next year's season? What is the value of predicting that there will be 3 to 15 named storms next season?

Matteo V
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: climate change / unpredictable weather/wind

Postby Matteo V » Mon Feb 10, 2020 6:06 pm

SimonP wrote:
Mon Feb 10, 2020 2:51 am
Matteo believes that all models are junk because a model run prediction may not occur. He does not understand the concept of an ensemble which gives an estimate of the probability that an event will occur. For example, we are currently watching Cyclone Uesi. Forecasters run the weather model many times with slight perturbations of the input conditions. At the moment, it looks as if it will run through the Tasman Sea but there is still a chance it could hit Australia or New Zealand.
The same is true for climate models. Ensemble runs show the range of possibilities. The interesting thing is that recent CMIP6 runs are showing a higher equilibrium climate sensitivity with the addition of more recent data.
Hopefully I can put this in an extremely simple manner.

Let's pretend that the ensemble of major models take an average track of the storm to be directly up a north/ south coast. What is the probability that the storm is mostly inland or mostly out to sea? 50/50, right? So will the storm be mostly over land, or over the sea?

By the ensemble, would not the most likely course be directly up that Coast in the center of all of the predictions? One would think so, but you would be very wrong to make that assumption. Just look back at actual past storm courses versus the predicted ensemble. What you will find here is that in every individual case with a long enough timeline, the center or average of all of the models, does not match the actual course of the storm. Also, let me state that another way. What you will find here is that in every average case with a long enough timeline, the center or average of all of the models do not match the actual course of the storm. This is specifically why no model from 10 years ago is the same exact model today. These models tend to be wrong much more so than right, so we keep tweaking them in order to make them more accurate. Sometimes those tweaks demonstrable reduce the accuracy. On occasion they may seem to temporarily increase accuracy, while statistically reducing accuracy.

The one thing that complex models of a single storm do demonstrate, is that the margin of error for all variables are viable starting points or future inputs. And this brings us back to the climate modeling issue with inputs within the margin of error.

Any outcome desired in any existing climate model can be achieved with the right combination of inputs within the margin of error for those inputs. To simplify, you can get anything you want out of climate modeling - global warming or global cooling.

And just like with storm tracks, you may have a 40% chance of landfall, but a 60% chance of the storm staying out to sea exists also. So while the average or most likely course is still out to sea, do you rely on that particular storm to never make landfall?



But the above it's not necessarily what I want you to argue against. What you need to prove before any argument is made about what I have stated in this post, is that a long enough timeline reduces the uncertainty or margin of error, instead of increasing it. That is the biggest problem that needs to be addressed before anything else. Current projections for even localized weather are horrible more than 10 days out. How bad are those projections for 10 years out? And how can you make a reasonable argument that those projections are more accurate on a longer time line, then less accurate as you increase time?
Last edited by Matteo V on Mon Feb 10, 2020 11:37 pm, edited 2 times in total.

B-Roc
Medium Poster
Posts: 105
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:05 am
Local Beach: Nahant, MA
Style: Kite landboarding and skiing
Gear: Gin, JOJO, Mac Para, Ozone, Flexifoil, Ground Industries, MBS
Brand Affiliation: None
Location: Massachusetts
Has thanked: 106 times
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: climate change / unpredictable weather/wind

Postby B-Roc » Mon Feb 10, 2020 6:12 pm

Are any hearts and minds being changed by this discussion?

Matteo V
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: climate change / unpredictable weather/wind

Postby Matteo V » Mon Feb 10, 2020 6:23 pm

B-Roc wrote:
Mon Feb 10, 2020 6:12 pm
Are any hearts and minds being changed by this discussion?
One forum user has stated that they have changed their position from decided to undecided. Though that is an extremely small sample size, I think it does highlight the reality that you cannot necessarily move someone from one extreme to the other as easily as getting them to simply questioning their position to some degree. An AGW denier will not become a global warming enthusiast and vice versa.

So I think the argument is more to sway those emotionally driven to hold an irrational position, toward rationality. Given that this issue is most logical and rational at the center position, this is to be expected.

foilholio
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 3429
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 3:20 am
Local Beach: Ventura Beach
Favorite Beaches: Tarifa
Style: Airstyle
Gear: Foils
Brand Affiliation: None
Has thanked: 227 times
Been thanked: 148 times

Re: climate change / unpredictable weather/wind

Postby foilholio » Mon Feb 10, 2020 8:01 pm

Against the weight of the media campaign to push alarm there is little hope to sway the other way. Even I feel pressure when I hear or read some of the things coming through.

Matteo I am amazed at your reserves to continue with this. The same short failings by those convinced of alarm are just stupefyingly repetitive. Can't stay on point, can't display logic. Trents interesting, but someone like slide...the guy is practically a bot. People talk about NPCs, well hello slide!

User avatar
SimonP
Frequent Poster
Posts: 495
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 4:49 am
Local Beach: Rotorua Lakes, Maketu, NZ
Favorite Beaches: Aotea, Maroochydore, Faro, Aitutaki
Style: Foiling, free-style, waves
Gear: J-shapes foil, Switch kites, Underground twintips, misc surfboards.
Brand Affiliation: None
Location: Bay of Plenty, New Zealand
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 25 times

Re: climate change / unpredictable weather/wind

Postby SimonP » Mon Feb 10, 2020 8:57 pm

Once again, you are confusing weather with climate. Weather is a single outcome, climate is what we get on average.
If you toss a coin, I can't tell you whether you will get heads or tails. But if you toss it a million times, I can tell you that you will get heads 50.0% of the time.
I can't tell you what the weather will be on 11 Feb 2050, but I can tell you that 2050 will almost certainly be warmer than 2020, unless there is a large Karakatoa/Pinatubo volcanic event or there is a drastic curtailment of greenhouse gas emissions.

PullStrings
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 2284
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2011 7:54 pm
Kiting since: 1999
Gear: LEI's & Surfboards
Has thanked: 252 times
Been thanked: 281 times

Re: climate change / unpredictable weather/wind

Postby PullStrings » Mon Feb 10, 2020 9:53 pm

Predicting is difficult !!

Image
Last edited by PullStrings on Mon Feb 10, 2020 10:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
These users thanked the author PullStrings for the post:
foilholio (Tue Feb 11, 2020 1:02 am)
Rating: 3.03%

Matteo V
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: climate change / unpredictable weather/wind

Postby Matteo V » Mon Feb 10, 2020 10:08 pm

SimonP wrote:
Mon Feb 10, 2020 2:51 am
Matteo believes that all models are junk because a model run prediction may not occur. He does not understand the concept of an ensemble which gives an estimate of the probability that an event will occur. For example, we are currently watching Cyclone Uesi. Forecasters run the weather model many times with slight perturbations of the input conditions. At the moment, it looks as if it will run through the Tasman Sea but there is still a chance it could hit Australia or New Zealand.
The same is true for climate models. Ensemble runs show the range of possibilities. The interesting thing is that recent CMIP6 runs are showing a higher equilibrium climate sensitivity with the addition of more recent data.
SimonP wrote:
Mon Feb 10, 2020 8:57 pm
Once again, you are confusing weather with climate. Weather is a single outcome, climate is what we get on average.

Who is confusing weather and climate? I specifically explained the differentiation between the two, and I presented the actual reason for your confusion, confusion which you have again confirmed.

foilholio
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 3429
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 3:20 am
Local Beach: Ventura Beach
Favorite Beaches: Tarifa
Style: Airstyle
Gear: Foils
Brand Affiliation: None
Has thanked: 227 times
Been thanked: 148 times

Re: climate change / unpredictable weather/wind

Postby foilholio » Tue Feb 11, 2020 1:10 am

SimonP wrote:Once again, you are confusing weather with climate.
Once again you are engaging in one of many logical fallacies and strawmanning me.
SimonP wrote: Weather is a single outcome, climate is what we get on average.
Average of what? Average of what? Average of what? Average of what? Average of what? Average of what? Average of what? Average of what? Average of what? Average of what? Average of what? Average of what? Average of what? Average of what? Average of what? Average of what? Average of what? Average of what? Average of what? Average of what? Average of what? Average of what? Average of what? Average of what?

Try do try, try try try try stay on topic and answer a single question. I know know know it is hard and you may be faced to face the dilemma of your logical inconsistencies but do try try try to answer a question.

SimonP wrote: But if you toss it a million times, I can tell you that you will get heads 50.0% of the time.
Somewhere I read that is not exactly correct but I get the point.
SimonP wrote: I can't tell you what the weather will be on 11 Feb 2050, but I can tell you that 2050 will almost certainly be warmer than 2020, unless there is a large Karakatoa/Pinatubo volcanic event
So what is the chance of a volcanic event? A coin toss? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


Return to “Snow / Land”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 157 guests