SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It?

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (201299)8/9/2017 1:05:41 PM
From: weatherguru6 Recommendations

Recommended By
DeplorableIrredeemableRedneck
Investor Clouseau
locogringo
rayrohn
TideGlider

and 1 more member

   of 224718
 
Wrong. It's a very important issue. Low-frequency variability is key to long-range forecasting (1 week to 1 year) , i.e., ENSO, Arctic Oscillation, Pacific-North American and other teleconnection patterns, persistent ridges of high pressure (Bermuda high, polar vortex, Pacific jet exit region), and the impacts these features have on storm tracks.

Climate models can't properly mimic these low-frequency features. These features play a HUGE role in redistributing temperature and momentum across the globe. Even if there's no "CO2 forcing" programmed into a model, the models can't even mimic the climatological state of the atmosphere. In other words, if a model can't even redistribute energy properly in the absence of forcing, you are left with low-frequency features that are erroneous in magnitude and structure. Throw in forcing, and the errors just get amplified. Error gets compounded over time.

If climate models are right, why is there no upper-tropospheric hot spot in the tropics?

Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext