[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
RE: Climate change vs BANDits
> > I don't think the science of man made global warming
> is as
> > settled as birds are dinosaurs.
> Sorry, but it is. Get over it.
As long as the laws of thermodynamics are not falsified ;-) (which is unlikely
to happen until Hell freezes over).
You cannot expect to exchange 49.5 gigatons of non-IR-absorbent matter by 49.5
gigatons of IR-absorbent matter - which is hat the measurements of atmospheric
CO2 show to have happened in the last 150 years or so - without the
thermodynamic balance of the system in question changing in reaction to that.
What is not settled is the *predictive* part - what region will be affected
how. It is actually not that hard (if you had basic climate science) to give a
rule-of-thumb prognostic. Increasing summer aridity in the Mediterranean, quite
likely coupled with an increased incidence of torrential precipitation in the
winter, is almost a given for example. As is increasing humidity in the Sahel.
But that is not science. Predictive climate *science*, for the sheer volume and
complexity of the task, is still bordering on the impossible. It is, however,
not completely impossible, because climate (as per its definition as the
"long-term average weather") is a far less complex system than weather and for
a considerable part follows entirely predictable patterns. You can, for
example, give a reasonably accurate prediction that at least one of the summers
2013-2015 will be very hot, if not super-hot (on global average), and how many
K this'll probably be. (How the Met Office managed to blow its winter
prediction this year is entirely beyond me. We have had a record low in solar
flux about 1 year ago; how this can *not* translate to a colder-than-average
winter I have no idea.)
Do You Yahoo!?
Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden Schutz gegen