In a recent article by prominent academics, "Climate models and precautionary measures," it is contended that the climate debate is about the accuracy or otherwise of climate models. Those who believe in climate models argue for specific – but unspecified – policy. Those who hold models to be inaccurate believe that there is no proof of harm sufficient to warrant action.
The chain of reasoning breaks at the very first link. Models are known without a doubt to be inaccurate. It is called "irreducible imprecision" and has been known about since Edward Lorenz plied his convection models in the 1960s. Models can have slightly different starting points as a result of uncertainty in inputs. Many solutions are thus possible, for a single model, that diverge exponentially over the calculation period. Irreducible imprecision is shown in the diagram below.
Source: Julia Slingo and Tim Palmer 2011
It is from a paper by Julia Slingo, head of the British Met Office, and Tim Palmer, head of the European Centre for Mid-Range Weather Forecasting. It is quite demonstrable math, but mention this on any global warming blog, and the inhabitants will exhibit severe agitation and fear and loathing as cognitive dissonance kicks in……Read More……