Comment on UQ by NW
Dr. Curry, this is OT but you might find it of interest as material for future posts:...
View ArticleComment on UQ by robin
There are a lot of steps between where they are and anything as anal as V&V. Basic common sense coding practices, tests, code reviews, documentation, naming, commenting, specs… I spent last night...
View ArticleComment on UQ by Dan Hughes
The word “training” is important, because generally speaking, a skilled simulationist running buggy software will consistently obtain predictions that are more accurate and more reliable that an...
View ArticleComment on UQ by Jim2
Of course you have to understand the problem, the way climate works, the science and math in order to create a climate model. But buggy software isn’t going to embody the correct math. You really have...
View ArticleComment on UQ by Steven Mosher
why do you think an accurate model is needed to for policy. We don’t have very good flood prediction models, yet we set policy about flood plains all the time. We cannot predict earthquakes, yet we...
View ArticleComment on UQ by Gareth Williams
You can average over a series of real-world measurements. Assuming they are independent and drawn from some probability distribution, the average is better than any one measurement. You can also...
View ArticleComment on UQ by Punksta
> We don’t have very good flood prediction models, yet we set policy about flood plains all the time. There is a difference though. Floods could possibly go to zero, but can’t go negative, like the...
View ArticleComment on UQ by Steven Mosher
A policy maker who uses the model results might not agree. “behaving” like the climate is over general and non testable
View ArticleComment on UQ by Steven Mosher
unfortunately rutherford was wrong. No experimental answer ever agrees exactly with the prediction.
View ArticleComment on UQ by Punksta
Rutherford. By an Occam argument, wouldn’t an experiment without stats be more preferred (and convincing) than one that did ?
View ArticleComment on Week in review 4/13/12 by WebHubTelescope
Chief Hydrologist is a sock puppet for Captain Kangaroo. Since Kangaroo is clearly wrong on asserting that heated water does not diffuse to regions of colder concentration (or lower thermal density),...
View ArticleComment on UQ by David Springer
Mosher, I’m glad to hear there are no runaway feedbacks. Tell me then what limits the positive feedbacks in climate models. I asked here for what it might be and physicistdave and Fred Moolten...
View ArticleComment on UQ by David Springer
Do any of the models reproduce ice ages? If they do then by definition some of them “show cooling”. If they do not then they are flawed. It’s really that simple. So which is it, Mosher? Do any models...
View ArticleComment on UQ by David Springer
Mosher doesn’t understand the difference between a flood and global warming, evidently. There are a great many floods so with a sample size that large we use actuarial techniques to assess risk. How...
View ArticleComment on Assessing climate model software quality by Doug Cotton
As you can see in the Appendix <a href="http://principia-scientific.org/publications/psi_radiated_energy.pdf" rel="nofollow">here</a> the long-term rate of increase in SST was about 0.06...
View ArticleComment on UQ by Joe's World
Judith, Missing other parameters are not an issue? Of course not. Just the mathematical equation is all important.
View ArticleClik here to view.
Comment on The Internet: World War 3.0 (?) by Pointman
“They will not control us …” Pointman
View ArticleComment on Assessing climate model software quality by Bart R
capt. dallas 0.8 +/-0.2 | April 18, 2012 at 11:14 am | ceteris non paribus | April 18, 2012 at 12:02 pm | Apologies, I ought have prefaced my post with something like, “Hanc marginis exiguitas non...
View Article