Most modelling is beyond most of us! But in that is the beauty to ‘activist’ , those that ‘follow the science’ and msm.Models can favourably answer any questions you like. It all boils down to one very simple quote” Feed shit in , get shit out”
Answer any science question these day and it is a simple as “follow the money”
The molecules I studied were SF6 and CF3I (can't do the subscripts).
Ferguson has been widely discredited. Some accuse him of worse than being mistaken. I'm not in anyway an IT person, but I read a paper by one, who said Ferguson couldn't document his code and that he'd likely fiddled it to give desired results.
Well, modelling can estimate/approximate absolute values that are worth paying some practical attention to if the underlying theory isn't too far off, the measurements used to build the model are reasonably accurate and precise, there is enough variation in the measurements used and available, the mathematical model employed doesn't have theoretical preconceptions and limitations built in to it, etc., etc. Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater just because other people don't know enough to carefully hold on to that baby when they do their baby-washing.
My point isn't that the models don't provide values. It's that the variations aren't being predicted correctly, so there's no reason to believe those values. Yet most people think those values are 'settled science'.
Got it. I guess we're saying the same thing, then -- many modelling predictions are counterfeit, but they can be otherwise with a whole lot of diligence (and especially no embedded biases). In the case of climate modelling, my outsider's impression is that all the modelling weaknesses there can be underlie the modelling efforts being carried out. Pretend (or cargo cult) modelling.
Most modelling is beyond most of us! But in that is the beauty to ‘activist’ , those that ‘follow the science’ and msm.Models can favourably answer any questions you like. It all boils down to one very simple quote” Feed shit in , get shit out”
Answer any science question these day and it is a simple as “follow the money”
GIGO = Garbage In, Garbage Out.
I don’t know why but the word ‘smallish’ really tickled my fancy.
Why has Imperial modeller been re- employed over and over despite some ‘smallish’ errors on his Sinclair ZX? (To commit a Massive Ferguson)
The molecules I studied were SF6 and CF3I (can't do the subscripts).
Ferguson has been widely discredited. Some accuse him of worse than being mistaken. I'm not in anyway an IT person, but I read a paper by one, who said Ferguson couldn't document his code and that he'd likely fiddled it to give desired results.
Prof Pantsdown( theoretical physicist/ mathematician)answered the question put to him favourably to those that were paying him
Well, modelling can estimate/approximate absolute values that are worth paying some practical attention to if the underlying theory isn't too far off, the measurements used to build the model are reasonably accurate and precise, there is enough variation in the measurements used and available, the mathematical model employed doesn't have theoretical preconceptions and limitations built in to it, etc., etc. Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater just because other people don't know enough to carefully hold on to that baby when they do their baby-washing.
My point isn't that the models don't provide values. It's that the variations aren't being predicted correctly, so there's no reason to believe those values. Yet most people think those values are 'settled science'.
Got it. I guess we're saying the same thing, then -- many modelling predictions are counterfeit, but they can be otherwise with a whole lot of diligence (and especially no embedded biases). In the case of climate modelling, my outsider's impression is that all the modelling weaknesses there can be underlie the modelling efforts being carried out. Pretend (or cargo cult) modelling.
Yes! I think the broader point is that what's claimed to be 'the settled science' on climate change mostly isn't from data but is from models.