Comments on: Simple Model Leaves Expensive Climate Models Cold http://www.masterresource.org/2009/11/simple-model-leaves-expensive-climate-models-cold/ A free-market energy blog Sat, 11 Feb 2012 20:41:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Bill Chaffee http://www.masterresource.org/2009/11/simple-model-leaves-expensive-climate-models-cold/comment-page-1/#comment-12926 Bill Chaffee Fri, 27 Aug 2010 08:09:10 +0000 http://www.masterresource.org/?p=5879#comment-12926 The naive model sounds like the null hypothesis to me. It is my impression that researchers are supposed to start with the null hypothesis. The naive model sounds like the null hypothesis to me. It is my impression that researchers are supposed to start with the null hypothesis.

]]> By: Blogengeezer http://www.masterresource.org/2009/11/simple-model-leaves-expensive-climate-models-cold/comment-page-1/#comment-3716 Blogengeezer Sat, 19 Dec 2009 17:40:34 +0000 http://www.masterresource.org/?p=5879#comment-3716 Picked up this interesting little note, can not seem to find verification: From the? notes of programmer, Ian Harry Harris, who tried to put the CRU's computer files and raw data - temperature reading from 1901 to 2006 into some sort of order. "Its Botch after Botch", he wrote. ..."This should have all been rewritten from scratch a year ago. ... As far as I can see, this renders the [weather] station counts totally meaningless".... Picked up this interesting little note, can not seem to find verification: From the? notes of programmer, Ian Harry Harris, who tried to put the CRU’s computer files and raw data – temperature reading from 1901 to 2006 into some sort of order. “Its Botch after Botch”, he wrote. …”This should have all been rewritten from scratch a year ago. … As far as I can see, this renders the [weather] station counts totally meaningless”….

]]> By: See - owe to Rich http://www.masterresource.org/2009/11/simple-model-leaves-expensive-climate-models-cold/comment-page-1/#comment-3466 See - owe to Rich Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:46:35 +0000 http://www.masterresource.org/?p=5879#comment-3466 Dear Drs. Armstrong and Green, That is very interesting to me, because I also have a "simple" model, detailed at http://www.climateaudit.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=71 , which I would quite like to compare to yours (and IPCC's). It is a linear model dependent on log(CO2) and the lengths of the previous two solar cycles. It does require about 22 years of previous data, so to compare with your forecasting I would have to start with a simpler model in the early years. Presumably you would recommend that at each epoch I estimate its parameters only from the previous years' data? I should also be interested to learn what you mean by the "IPCC model" with you are comparing. If you are interested in taking this further then rather than communicating here perhaps we could use email? Feel free to email me if you wish. In summary, I believe that my simple model will prove to be better than yours, and I hope that piques your interest. And since it does allow for some temperature increase due to CO2, it is less likely to be rejected out of hand by the mainstream. Oh wait, it uses solar variations, I retract that last comment :-) Rich. Dear Drs. Armstrong and Green,

That is very interesting to me, because I also have a “simple” model, detailed at
http://www.climateaudit.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=71 , which I would quite like to compare to yours (and IPCC’s). It is a linear model dependent on log(CO2) and the lengths of the previous two solar cycles.

It does require about 22 years of previous data, so to compare with your forecasting I would have to start with a simpler model in the early years. Presumably you would recommend that at each epoch I estimate its parameters only from the previous years’ data?

I should also be interested to learn what you mean by the “IPCC model” with you are comparing. If you are interested in taking this further then rather than communicating here perhaps we could use email? Feel free to email me if you wish.

In summary, I believe that my simple model will prove to be better than yours, and I hope that piques your interest. And since it does allow for some temperature increase due to CO2, it is less likely to be rejected out of hand by the mainstream. Oh wait, it uses solar variations, I retract that last comment :-)

Rich.

]]> By: dearieme http://www.masterresource.org/2009/11/simple-model-leaves-expensive-climate-models-cold/comment-page-1/#comment-3409 dearieme Fri, 27 Nov 2009 18:11:36 +0000 http://www.masterresource.org/?p=5879#comment-3409 Congratulations on this fascinating study. Moreoever, from your paper:- "We used the Hadley (HadCRUT3) “best estimate”..": oh, the irony. So this is based on original data that CRU claims to have lost, that they had processed through code described in the mirth-promoting Harry Read Me from the Climategate scandal. And the upshot is that you have equipped us to poke even more fun at the absurd pretentions of Climate Modelling. Thank you for making me smile. Congratulations on this fascinating study. Moreoever, from your paper:-
“We used the Hadley (HadCRUT3) “best estimate”..”: oh, the irony. So this is based on original data that CRU claims to have lost, that they had processed through code described in the mirth-promoting Harry Read Me from the Climategate scandal. And the upshot is that you have equipped us to poke even more fun at the absurd pretentions of Climate Modelling. Thank you for making me smile.

]]> By: Mark Krebs http://www.masterresource.org/2009/11/simple-model-leaves-expensive-climate-models-cold/comment-page-1/#comment-3391 Mark Krebs Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:50:50 +0000 http://www.masterresource.org/?p=5879#comment-3391 I think Albert Einstein would agree since he said: •Problems can never be solved by thinking on the same level that created them. •Solutions to problems should be as simple as possible – but no simpler. I think Albert Einstein would agree since he said:
•Problems can never be solved by thinking on the same level that created them.
•Solutions to problems should be as simple as possible – but no simpler.

]]> By: John Thorpe http://www.masterresource.org/2009/11/simple-model-leaves-expensive-climate-models-cold/comment-page-1/#comment-3384 John Thorpe Tue, 24 Nov 2009 11:55:45 +0000 http://www.masterresource.org/?p=5879#comment-3384 This is a simple and yet stunning piece of work that needs a wider audience. Links to this have be duly distributed to blogs across the blogosphere! This is a simple and yet stunning piece of work that needs a wider audience. Links to this have be duly distributed to blogs across the blogosphere!

]]> By: Eee-Gad! A Simpler Climate Model That Actually Works? : Odd Citizen http://www.masterresource.org/2009/11/simple-model-leaves-expensive-climate-models-cold/comment-page-1/#comment-3379 Eee-Gad! A Simpler Climate Model That Actually Works? : Odd Citizen Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:56:01 +0000 http://www.masterresource.org/?p=5879#comment-3379 [...] While stumbling around the climate blogosphere I came across this, just published report: Simple Model Leaves Expensive Climate Models Cold [...] [...] While stumbling around the climate blogosphere I came across this, just published report: Simple Model Leaves Expensive Climate Models Cold [...]

]]>