In his op-ed “The mathematical truth about climate change” (June 21, TribLIVE), Richard Krauland questions the validity of climate modeling. After much tortured reasoning, Krauland summarizes his arguments as follows: “Every single mathematical calculation actually serves to compound the error factor in the final answer. … Every complex computer model, climate or otherwise, will always have an error factor that overwhelms its actual calculated outputs.”
Krauland’s claim would surely surprise the designers of airplanes, electronic devices, cars, medical equipment and many other products. They all use complex computer models with great success.
The best test of any computer model is how well its predicted results compare to actual measurements. Climate models have been making testable predictions since the 1970s, so we can go back to those predictions and see how well they did.
A Dec. 4, 2019, peer-reviewed publication titled “Evaluating the Performance of Past Climate Model Projections” does just that. It turns out that climate models have predicted for decades that the global temperature would now be about 1 degree Celsius above pre-industrial levels — in good agreement with current measurements. If Krauland truly seeks “guidance from the real science world,” he should consult this publication in Geophysical Research Letters.
Robert Mitchell
Murrysville