ONE way to help shift an accepted scientific paradigm (e.g. Anthropogenic Global Warming) is by coming up with a more practical and relevant way of describing and predicting real physical processes in the natural world (e.g. a better seasonal rainfall forecast).
Yep,
gotta love those Dorothy Dixers.
Burke pulled out a classic 'dixer' last week re the MDBP.
Soooo obviously political and soooo obviously competetive 🙂
I don't know what I've enjoyed most...
Shallow and snobbish Lysenkoists posturing as serious researchers, flattering one another and exchanging their Dorothy Dixers? Or an arbitrary cut-and-paste from any old tech-talk that contained the words "neural network"?
No, I think it was the bits about leaving, even if - like all else they project - it doesn't really happen.
Gee whiz Bazza,
it didn't take long for you to pick up that gun again.
You definitely seem to miss the fact that my complaint is not about the science or scientists per se.
Unlike you apparently, I am a results orientated person and I judge policy by results not by political ideologies.
Climate science has been hijacked and the projective work in particular has been used inappropriately.
That has very little to do with right or left.
I should also point out that right and left are socialist terms and therefore almost irrelevant to this discussion.
Labelling 'groups' and claiming there are 'sides' is totally counter productive.
Taxpayers actually want 'value' and practical social policy.
Out in the real world where we are responsible for producing, people like me are tired of the political rhetorical spin and thoroughly appalled at the huge amount of money being wasted on 'marketting' or 'packaging' something that obviously is not yet capable of delivering on its promises.
The results of current ideologies that use international treaties and trip the 'precautionary principle' are stifling and overwhelmingly negative.
I have no problem at all with continuing work on climate/weather forecasting. If Jen and Abbot can make a positive contribution to that, then more power and more funding to them.
The increasingly impressive data banks should assist some real progress if we were actually focusing on shared goals.
Tracking back I found this @ IEEEexplore 2008
"Using neural network emulations of model physics in numerical model ensembles" Abstract-
In this paper the use of the neural network emulation technique, developed earlier by the authors, is investigated in application to ensembles of general circulation models used for the weather prediction and climate simulation. It is shown that the neural network emulation technique allows us: (1) to introduce fast versions of model physics (or components of model physics) that can speed up calculations of any type of ensemble up to 2 -3 times; (2) to conveniently an naturally introduce perturbations in the model physics (or a component of model physics) and to develop a fast versions of perturbed model physics (or fast perturbed components of model physics), and (3) to make the computation time for the entire ensemble (in the case of short term perturbed physics ensemble introduced in this paper) comparable with the computation time that is needed for a single model run."
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/mostRecentIssue.jsp?punumber=4625775
and this -
"A simplified recurrent neural network for solving nonlinear variational inequalities" Abstract-
"A recurrent neural network is proposed to deal with the nonlinear variational inequalities with linear equality and nonlinear inequality constraints. By exploiting the equality constraints, the original variational inequality problem can be transformed into a simplified one with only inequality constraints. Therefore, by solving this simplified problem, the neural network architecture complexity is reduced dramatically. In addition, the proposed neural network can also be applied to the constrained optimization problems, and it is proved that the convex condition on the objective function of the optimization problem can be relaxed. Finally, the satisfactory performance of the proposed approach is demonstrated by simulation examples"
Please carry on
Cheers
"I should fade away..."
"Well my contract has expired too so that’s it folks."
Never mind. To paraphrase A. A. Schwarzenegger, they'll be back!
But we would just hate you to miss any tiny bit of the agony.
Maybe all this extra CO2 is making you too sensitive?
Or just a little decoupled?
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/06/07/claim-todays-climate-is-more-sensitive-than-that-of-the-past/
Red-neck laughter in the bar isn't always directed at you.
There you have it folks; amphigory of the lowest order from as self-satisfied a pair of nitwits as is available outside of Federal parliament.
Let me finish by once again congratulating Jennifer on her paper, which amongst other things, reminds us of the parlous position official climate science, that is from the BOM and CSIRO, is in this country.
Good night and good luck.
Just read Bazza's final analysis on the lack of analysis. Well my contract has expired too so that's it folks.
6 wasted comments. It's amazing to think that some the bloggians here couldn't themselves do a daily drive by of Watts and Novas to check the latest disinformation ruse. They're incapable. Meanwhile Cohenite ducks and weaves and Debs still can't think of anything.
I rest my case Cohers. It needs a good old conspiracy theory beloved of the right to explain the decline in useful contributors but not contributions/contributor, as we drift to a double century with a little heat and a fading light. Remember when Douglas Macarthur got sacked. The story is roughly this: he told the US senate “old soldiers never die, they just fade away. “ HL Mencken reported “ there was not a dry eye on the republican side, nor a dry seat on the Democrats.” Red of eye and red of neck, I say. Back to conspiracy message. Deb is clearly a double agent – an infiltrator driving away potential contributors in droves. Well done Deb, pat yourself on the back. What can be said of Luke. Maybe he is moonlighting (now there is a driver) employed by the operator to add some scientific respectability to the debates, if they could be called that. Also serves as a bit of a dunk tank – nothing like a right wing think tank. Score a hit on him (fluke the Luke) even from a cheap shot and you get to dunk him. Such gratitude for injecting a bit of hard evidence from mainstream science into the non-debates. Then there is Cohers, bless him, all ready fire aim, hit and run injecting a bit of random sidestream science from up the creek. Not to mention the rent a crowds, maybe Robert and Neville, perhaps they are alter egos tossing in random fizzer grenades . And the spangled drongo, ever the empiricist has undoubtedly gone north for the winter not realising with his limited context in time and space etc that it’s a warming world. And of course Gavin from left field , gotta love him underpinning the empiricists and the trajectories of the projectile modellers with his well grounded understanding of measurement errors, a long way from the biases of the right whingers. Flashback to spangles. He also has the drum on sea level rise (albeit a sample of n=1, but that is oK here ) and he quotes Lawson so things aint all bad, “Whether the sea or the bush it be, The heart of a man prevails”. So heads up from that. I should fade away, the joke is not on me.