Climate models are constantly being misrepresented and the public has been sold impossible expectations by folks more interested in power-politics than learning about our planet.
Climate models are tools. Tools to help scientists understand dynamics in action. No one has ever pretended they could accurately prediction the future. They inform us about dynamics and trends. We human minds need to figure out the rest.
One of the slickest, and sickest, tricks folks like McIntyre, Sen. Inhofe, Morano, Heartland, and pals have pulled off, is misleading the public into believing that if climate models weren't perfect they deserve ridicule.
Sadly the folks that attack climate models the most, are least interested in learning about them. But, there must be people who do want to learn,
I tell myself.
The first successful numerical weather forecast was made on the ENIAC (with fewer than 10 words memory) in 1950. This talk traces the development of atmospheric General Circulation Models (GCMs) for weather forecasting, to Global Climate Models (GCMs) and Earth System Models (ESMs) to illustrate the guts and gore of the huge codes.
If we cannot predict the weather beyond 2 weeks, what do we mean by climate projections for the next century?
Professor Inez Fung is speaking to a university audience so perhaps at moments she talks just at, or barely above, the heads of us regular folks. Still, for those familiar with the basics of the science and a curiosity to learn more, you'll find this expert's talk fascinating and worth paying attention to.
As part of my own learning process for especially good talks I make a rough time signature log for later reference and so I'll share that also.