Dr. Scott Armstrong on Climate Forecasting - Part III

Dr. Scott Armstrong, a leading expert on forecasting with the Wharton School at University of Pennsylvania, has challenged Al Gore to a bet. He bets that the "naive model" of no change will outperform the climate model forecasts over the next ten years. Armstrong argues that the model-based climate predictions of the IPCC are "forecasts by scientists rather than scientific forecasts."

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• ClimateBet
• ScottArmstrong
• Scott
• Armstrong
• AlGore
• Al
• Gore
• climate
• forecasting
• GlobalWarming
• global
• warming
• bet

[OleCoward]

We have very small chances to ever change the weather or climate. What we can do, and is easy, is to adapt to the climate changes that occur over generations. Climate changes will and have always been there. We have had both warmer and colder climates the last 1000 years, but the false and still used hockey stick graph don't show this.

[OleCoward]

- The greenhouse effect of CO2 is a very small contributor to the temperature on earth. Other varying contributors are far greater and varies far more in short and longer term.

- The global temperature the last few years have not risen the last few years, even though the CO2 emissions have increased.

[OleCoward]

"Climate" IS a statistical measure. "Global warming" is just a trend you can read from those statistics.

The properties you describe of CO2 is understood. What seems to not be understood by the IPCC and Al Gore is:

- Most of the CO2 is not made by huuman activities

- That the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is very very small compared to other gases

[rsmith02]

This fellow is talking more about trends in the future than explaining the warming to date, as far as I can tell.

Statistical analysis without a strong underpinning in physics is just bound to lead one astray. Global warming is *not* a stastical phenomenon but the result of fairly well-understood physical processes- at its core the heat-trapping properties of CO2.

[rsmith02]

Models aren't forecasts. They are projections based on different scenarios (emission changes due to economic changes, climate policy, etc). Why does this Professor "challenge" Al Gore, a popularize or science, versus scientists from NASA or the IPCC?

[Wybigtrails]

Science based forecasting is for people who don't have a financial interest in what they are forecasting. Con men make predictions to make money and don't care about science based anything.