TakeOnIt
Compare opinions of world leading experts and influencers.

Will the 2007 IPCC computer models make accurate predictions?

Background

The earth's climate is described with GCMs (General Circulation Models or Global Climate Models). GCMs are complex, containing many input variables and positive and negative feedback loops. These models are simulated on supercomputers to create predictions. The IPCC's predictions are based on an aggregate assessment of several GCMs.

Implications to Other Questions




Experts

Suggest Expert Quote (click to expand, no login required)
Agree
Experts In Climatology


RealClimate    Climatology Blog
Agree
We discuss climate models a lot, and from the comments here and in other forums it’s clear that there remains a great deal of confusion about what climate models do and how their results should be interpreted. This post is designed to be a FAQ for climate model questions. ... All models show basically the same behaviour that is in line with basic theory and observations.
03 Nov 2008    Source


Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change    (IPCC) Scientific Body formed by U.N.
Agree
There is considerable confidence that climate models provide credible quantitative estimates of future climate change, particularly at continental scales and above. This confidence comes from the foundation of the models in accepted physical principles and from their ability to reproduce observed features of current climate and past climate changes. ... models have consistently provided a robust and unambiguous picture of significant climate warming in response to increasing greenhouse gases.
01 Jan 2008    Source


Andrew Dessler    Climatology Professor
Agree
So how do we get a sense of the reliability of climate models? The approach taken by the scientific community is really the only one available: analyze and validate the individual processes in the climate models. ... If you can validate enough processes of the model (water vapor, clouds, ice, oceans, etc.) then you generate confidence that your model is probably making predictions that are at least in the ballpark.
25 Feb 2009    Source


Disagree
Experts In Science


Denis Rancourt    Physics Professor
Disagree
There is of course much more wrong with state-of-the-art global circulation models (climate models) than the assumption and implementation of CO2-H2O feedback. Although these models are among the most elaborate predictive models of complex non-linear phenomena, they are nonetheless sweeping oversimplifications of the global climate system and its mechanistic intricacies.
27 Feb 2007    Source


Andrew Monaghan    Meteorologist
Mostly Disagree
This paper provides further evidence that the multi-decadal global climate models are significantly overstating the water vapor input into the atmosphere, and thus are not providing quantitatively realistic estimates of how the climate system responds to the increase in atmospheric well mixed greenhouse gases in terms of the water vapor feedback. This water vapor feedback is required in order to achieve the amount of warming from radiative forcing projected in the 2007 IPCC report.
01 Jan 2008    Source


Robert Carter    Marine Geophysical Professor
Disagree
With the complete discrediting of the ‘hockey stick’ curve of recent temperature change (McIntyre and McKitrick, 2003, 2005; Wegman, Scott and Said, 2006) that was the icon of their report, the IPCC case for dangerous human-caused warming now rests only on ambiguous anecdotal evidence, unvalidated computer models and misleading attribution studies (IPCC, 2007).
02 May 2007    Source


Freeman Dyson    Physics Professor
Disagree
The [climate] models solve the equations of fluid dynamics, and they do a very good job of describing the fluid motions of the atmosphere and the oceans. They do a very poor job of describing the clouds, the dust, the chemistry, and the biology of fields and farms and forests. Many basic processes of planetary ecology are poorly understood. They must be better understood before we can reach an accurate diagnosis of the present condition of our planet.
14 Aug 2007    Source


Miscellaneous Experts


Donald DuBois    Computer Modeller
Mostly Disagree
[Models can be misleading, because] underlying assumptions can completely predetermine the results of the model. If the major climate models that are having a major impact on public policy were documented and put in the public domain, other qualified professionals around the world would be interested in looking into the validity of these models. Right now, climate science is a black box that is highly questionable with unstated assumptions and model inputs.
17 May 2007    Source



Comments

Add Your TakeOnIt (click to expand, no login required)
cornwall_5 gave their takeonit on 14 Aug 2009
Mostly Agree
If one is a firm believer in GIGO (garbage in, garbage out) and that, therefore, computer models are faulty, and specifically that computer models that predict a significant global warming in the 21st century due to humans are faulty, then it also follows that computer models are faulty for proving the opposite point of view: that there is no significant global warming or that humans contribute negligibly. In other words, one is in a "you cannot prove god exists, you cannot prove god does not exist" situation.

I thought I could do a simple search online for computer models that might offer a different prediction than the ones currently recognized internationally, which predict significant global warming caused by humans.

Every time I find any counter website, the website reveals its anti-socialist, pro-capitalism political bias. Moreover, they completely discredit themselves with their irrationality, because they never logically consistently apply the fact that - if computer models are faulty at predicting future - or even past - cause and effect - from some arbitrarily chosen initial condition - and computer models merely include the ideas we humans put into them,
then it follows that humans - without the help of computers - are far LESS capable of logically consistently determining cause and effect with their single-variable mind and extremely limited ability to hold massive amounts of data in their memory, compared to a computer.