"Reed, I did link to the article, which you said was interesting, that showed how chaotic physical processes could bifurcate the outcome of climate change. (long time ago in this thread)"
I recall that. It *was* interesting, but as I said then, it dealt mainly with prescribing areas of study to improve then-current understanding of climate, and having been published about 2001, it is now considerably outdated. Also, it says chaos and complexity make predictions challenging, not impossible. All of which is now beside the point.
I'm asking you, what YOU can predict, not what cannot be predicted. What does chaos theory, or your enhanced interpretation of chaos theory or whatever, allow you to predict that cannot be predicted without it?
"Because that is what Chaos theory allows the prediction of areas of instability. We can predict the instability, not the end result of the instabilit
As I see it, physical modelling, using energy as one's dominant paradigm, allows predicting such phenomena as anomalous (record-setting) cold days, hot days, storms, and specifically predicts correctly that higher ocean temperatures cause more atmospheric water vapor (5% increase over a few decades ago) leading to higher, more catastrophically damaging rainfall during storms. You can classify these as chaotic effects, and I would, but I never needed chaos theory to understand why they are results of radiative forcing by CO₂ and other greenhouse gases, nor did professional climate scientists rely on chaos theory to make those correct predictions.
About Climate Change
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
No comments:
Post a Comment