Are Climate Models Spatially Consistent?

An interesting link left by Curious on the open thread. I will read later. –Jeff

h/t Curious, HR at Watts Up tips and notes:

Click to access cpd-8-2409-2012.pdf

Climate of the last millennium:ensemble consistency of simulations and reconstructions
O. Bothe, J. H. Jungclaus, D. Zanchettin, and E. Zorita

Are simulations and reconstructions of past climate and its variability comparable with each other? We assess if simulations and reconstructions are consistent under the paradigm of a statistically indistinguishable ensemble. Ensemble consistency is assessed for Northern Hemisphere mean temperature, Central European mean temperature and for global temperature fields for the elimate of the last millennium. Reconstructions available for these regions are evaluated against the simulation data from the community simulations of the climate of the last millennium performed at the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology.

The distributions of ensemble simulated temperatures are generally too wide at most locations and on most time-scales relative to the employed reconstructions. Similarly,an ensemble of reconstructions is too wide when evaluated against the simulation ensemble mean.Probabilistic and climatological ensemble consistency is limited to sub-domains and sub-periods. Only the ensemble simulated and reconstructed annual Central European mean temperatures for the second half of the last millennium demonstrates consistency.

The lack of consistency found in our analyses implies that, on the basis of the studied data sets, no status of truth can be assumed for climate evolutions on the considered spatial and temporal scales and, thus, assessing the accuracy of reconstructions and simulations is so far of limited feasibility in pre-instrumental periods.


Today’s supreme court “health sickness care” ruling is an enormous blow to Americans. Our past successes have been created by a governmental philosophy of ‘the people know best’. Today we are told that in fact, ‘government knows best’. They flat stated, “You will buy OUR soup! or we will Tax you!” As a business owner, I can’t even begin to list the horrors which will now extend from this “Constitutional” interpretation even well after the law is struck down. It is very hard to understand how the single most successful culture in world history requires such a radical and truly violent change to what made us successful. Conservative American thoughts become even more incredulous when we consider that most of our health care troubles were created by government in the first place. It is, however, very easy to understand the sales angle – free stuff for those who don’t work hard.

As Europe watches, they have been saturated with endless media mis-portraying the US health care system as one which does not provide to those whom cannot pay. The misrepresentation of reality by the global media corporations could not be more disingenuous. In reality, “We the People” GIVE more to the poor more money than ANY country on actual dollar basis. We could do this in the past because we were allowed to own and create wealth at will. What is often forgotten is that America also created the majority of the industrial and medical advances in the world despite our small population (popular disadvantage). A common theme of this blog that shouldn’t surprise regular readers is that we all MUST question our information sources a little more vigorously.

NO I am not America centric. I am capitalist centric. America certainly cannot be accused of having the best breeding, best intelligence, finest minds. What we have had was a system which allowed people to gain individually for their own efforts. The freedom to express our opinions without oppression. The freedom to make money and not have it stolen by those who haven’t even tried to work. In the past, if you built the better mouse trap, you could make a hell of a lot of personal wealth in exchange for your efforts. You still can, but the hidden truth is that the probability of success with your mousetrap is being dramatically reduced. The feedback of recent economically negative forcing will have decades of true lag time.

I am certain that much of Europe is watching America gradually make the transition to the European/Russian/third world government system with an odd feeling of satisfaction. Watching us self-destruct in the same haze they experienced, can give them comfort, but America’s future has more than mild global consequences. What is happening now to our country is not a local problem. Europeans should realize that the destruction of the American system is the ruination of what is obviously the best hope for governance of mankind.

That though, is not the point of this post.

Capitalism is a math problem. To me it is of the same family as Mannian multivariate regression using noisy predictors. If you have noisy data (every person has their own unique mind) and you fit it to a predicatand (what everyone wants), by probability, you are guaranteed to maximize the popular result to which we all naturally seek. Despite my present discouragement, few will deny that it is an indisputable societal fact that in all cases, the average of a group of individuals will seek the position to their best advantage.

This leads me to an oxymoron of Republican thought – A capitalist who doesn’t believe in evolution. The concept is beyond resolution for me.

So rhetorically speaking, what happens when Americans have free health care, food, and housing handed to them if they can demonstrate that they are poor (unemployed) enough?

I have to tell you, I’m tired of working 15 hour days as a business owner simply to pay massive taxes that are multiples of my pay while listening to lazy, over-payed, government bureaucrats blather that they think WE should pay more for their wonderful service.

Simple math folks. Whether you believe this law is devastating (as I do) or simply another minor step, the math is at a minimum guaranteed to shift some portion of the functionally capable population away from effort.

Penguin Divination

Climate science hasn’t changed a bit since climategate. Sure there are now some climate scientists trying to find a middle ground between insane liberal energy activism and reality, but why is anything other than simple reality necessary? A slow path to Euro-crazy politics is still the wrong path. Case in point, a couple of months ago, a study of the Emperor penguin population came out in which satellite estimates show that there are over a half million of the beasts roaming the icy wasteland. The ever-accurate environmental studies stated previously that there were only two or three hundered thousand. So that is good news right?

Naw, it is just more penguins to worry about. The news reports simply have more to say about the future of the penguins and why our SUV’s are killing them.

More recently, another article came out and captured substantially more press, unsurprisingly, the now half million Emperor penguins are in danger of complete extinction at captitalist hands. This paper is chock full of brilliant mushmatics including climate model projections in combination with models of how penguin colonies will respond. It is worth mentioning that famous names like Mark Serreze, an ever stable AGW advocate, is signed on as a coauthor of this beauty. I’ve taken the time to read through it once, and am certainly the dumber for it.

They came up with functions for the survivability of penguins based on sea ice concentrations that have very steep drop off in sea ice concentration ranges for which no real observational long term data can exist. Then they project this drop-off in survival using 5 preferred climate models which have universally predicted Antarctic sea ice doom. The ability to draw conclusions a century out from this methodology is ridiculous on its face, but we know in enviroscience that unknowns are regularly waved away into magically sound conclusion. What makes this mush-science special, besides the fact that Antarctic sea ice is NOT declining, is the huge over the top press it is getting.

Melting Sea Ice Could Decimate Emperor Penguins

Melting sea ice trouble for emperor penguins

June 22 News: Researchers Project ‘Huge Decline’ In Emperor

Global warming stamping out penguin population

Emperor Penguins at Risk of Facing Extinction

Emperor Penguin on the verge of Extinction, Antarctica ice melting

As Antarctica melts, Emperor penguins struggle for survival

Melting ice in Antarctica threatens Emperor penguins: Study

Antarctic sea ice loss threatening emperor penguins

Emperor penguins at risk in sea ice

Penguins May Lose Empire to Climate Change

Melting Sea Ice Threatens Emperor Penguins

Penguins Face Population Decline Due To Climate Change

Emperor penguins numbers are falling because of melting ice caps

Global Warming Causing Extinction Of Penguins In Antarctica: Report

Now any normal person would find these titles insane on their face.   Seriously, most of these aren’t supported by the study in any way whatsoever.   Not that the authors are helping the writers to be more reasonable:


A multi-hundred billion dollar industry known as environmentalism is not going to be seriously interrupted by the exposure or discussion of their motivations.  The human race has shown no propensity to reject the enviro-stupidity fed them by the liberal media outlets. 

As a monument to general human intellect, the use of a tiny noisy trend in thousands of different decadal datasets to predict numerous century scale disasters has literally become one of the most powerful industries in the world. The mathematical chicken bones give the future, and the people believe!

On and on the inscrutable gears of enviroscience turn. From it all, I have a prediction for the future of the Emperor penguin population which I will not be around to verify. In the year 2100, there will be approximately 500,000 very cold Emperor penguins stomping around the Antarctic, and nearly twice as many scientists as today, still predicting penguin doom.

Climate as A Differential Equations Problem

I hope to be a blogger someday again but in the meantime Timetochooseagain kindly offered this contribution –  Jeff



I find that when discussing problems of what are ostensibly physical systems, little progress can be made until people formulate their ideas in coherent mathematical terms. At that point there can be no arguing, a statement is either mathematically correct or it isn’t, and it will be completely unambiguous. The only ambiguous questions should be the values of various coefficients and constants, as long as we are sure of equations that characterize the problem. However, much confusion in discussions of climate comes about because the equations that are thought to characterize the problem are rarely stated, and even when they are, they are difficult for most people to understand, partly due to a common lack of numeracy at the necessary level (in this case, understanding of at least some calculus would be helpful, perhaps necessary) and also the fact that no attempt is made to explain the underlying equations to the laymen (I honestly know of zero counter examples). I am going to attempt to explain what I presently understand to be the equations which characterize the climate problem as it is commonly thought about, and try my best explain what the equations mean.

Continue reading “Climate as A Differential Equations Problem”