[TheForge] OT weather v. climate

[schade at acegroup.cc]

On Mar 2, 2007, at 7:19 PM, Jerry Frost wrote:

> Question two, unintentional or not. I think it's simply a matter a way  
> to make money for folk who are otherwise unemployable. The best  
> computer models on the planet running on the fastest computers on the  
> planet can't reliably predict the weather more than a couple days in  
> advance. Why in the world anyone would believe someone who try tellng  
> us what it's going to do a century from now amazes me.
>
____________________________________

http://illconsidered.blogspot.com/2006/03/we-cant-even-predict-weather- 
next-week.html

We Can't Even Predict the Weather Next Week
(Part of the How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic guide)

Objection:
Scientists can't even predict the weather next week, so why should we  
believe what some climate model tells us about 100 years from now.

This is a very common line and might even be sincere if presented from  
someone completely ignorant of the difference between climate and  
weather. Usually it is more of a childish taunt, only one step above  
name calling. Just remember that the only chance the denialists have is  
if they can bring you down to a very low level of debate.

Answer:
Climate and weather are really very different things and the level of  
predictability is comparably different. Think of it as the difference  
between trying to predict the height of the fifth wave from now that  
will come splashing up the beach versus predicting the height of  
tomorrow's high tide.

Climate is defined as weather averaged over a period of time, generally  
around 30 years. This averaging over time removes the random and  
unpredictable behaviour of weather. This by no means says that it is  
necessarily easy to predict climate changes, but clearly siezing on the  
weather man's one week failure to cast doubt on a climate model's 100  
year projection is an argument of ignorance.

clipped by Bob