Do you know what a partial derivative is ??
If you knew the function which was the partial derivative of some process, lets say PT/PC where the P is the partial sign.
Could you if asked calculate the new T given the current T and a change in C with all other vars held steady.
Could you do this accurately without the other vars held steady.
Nope I don't get it. Especially since climate estimates have a strong random component to them. Whatever the baseline we built our civilization on is being changed. Climate still fluctuates wildly but now it's average value is being driven up by a process that is far more stable.
You still don't understand. Climate models only predict CO2 forcing, the rest of the random component could not have possibly been predicted. Just like I can say July will be 50 deg warmer than January on average and still be right despite many days that do not bear this out.
EVERY model was wrong, and said many times. They predicted a directly proportional relationship between temperature and CO2 levels and it has not been borne out.
"Why" they are wrong is because they predicted one thing and it did not happen.
So you see the contradiction in these two sentences??
I doubt that you do. So here is an example.
I propose there is a direct relationship between the setting dial on my oven and the temperature inside.
However 2:00AM sunday morning the oven was cooler than the relationship predicted.
That's OK because I only meant to quantify the relationship between the dial and and the temp inside under all other things being equal footing.
1 Oven On.
2 Utility voltage nominal
3 Door closed.
4 Nominal ambient outside the oven...
Several unrelated variables effect this relationship but i really don't care about them in my model.
Is this enough simple description for you to understand.
And yet you have NEVER said which model was wrong and why.
And you still fail to grasp that climate models predict only the CO2 forcing not the absolute materialized temperature. How the hill could they.
With your level of stupidity there isn't much to discuss.
Their reference was not to the use of this scientific data for improvement of modeling given the context of these ludicrous utterings. It was in fact just to say essentially "so what" to current climate deviations.
LIke someone becoming very concerned during a tornado warning when the power went out and an absolute idiot piping up with "so what it's been out before"
Get mad because McConnel took away their ability to stack imagration onto homeland security.
Nobody believes that but RWNJ. At least that is what some are putting forth as their reason for going against this Obama policy.
Like their confusing rules prohibiting the throttling of classes of internet traffic with actually throttling traffic.
Watching them spin this issue is the best comedy around.
Suppose a scientist devised a model to estimate wind speed 300 ft above a hilltop based on weather stations 50 miles away. The predictive model is compared to actual measurements and the errors analyzed.
Taking the raw instantaneous readings vs predicted gives large errors swinging plus and minus randomly but this time frame is not important.
Smoothing the instantaneous readings by a moving average chosen to best suit the need for the data reduces the errors significantly. Smoothing tooooo much makes the errors large again.
But choosing a smoothing method that matches the problem the scientist is attempting to solve gives estimates with 10% absolute error and this is good enough.
This was just some background for the board half wit who continuously claims that climate models have been complete failures. Obviously they have not.
Per capita fossil fuel usage of USA vs Germany.
Do they live so poorly in Germany, France, Ireland, UK
They use nearly half per capita fossil fuel.
We could do without luxury consumption which is 50% of the usage in the USA.
Well so an individual feels that protecting our planet for the survival of future generations is his primary concern he is a kook.
How about an individual who is indifferent to what mess we leave our grandchildren. This is the definition of a kook and if you don't agree you are in that box already.