Access
This article is part of Nature's premium content.
Published online 15 September 2008 | Nature | doi:10.1038/news.2008.1108
News
Pushing the modelling envelope
Could more than 60% of 'climate envelope' studies be wrong?
Estimates of the impact climate change will have on wildlife may be much less reliable than thought, according to research that is reopening debate over a widely used modelling method endorsed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
'Climate envelope' models use current distributions of species to construct an idea of the climatic conditions that suit them.
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Comments
Reader comments are usually moderated after posting. If you find something offensive or inappropriate, you can speed this process by clicking 'Report this comment' (or, if that doesn't work for you, email redesign@nature.com). For more controversial topics, we reserve the right to moderate before comments are published.
SUN-EARTH CONNECTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)has done a good research and the awards has already been given to the members of this panel without testing the model. A group of scientists accross the world has the opinion that there are major role of Sun and distant stars explosion in the form of cosmic ray variation and change in the Electron cover of the earth do exist. Following are some references which do not disagree with the IPCC but a humble note to rethink. References: Mukherjee,S.(2008) Cosmic influence on Environment of the Earth Sensors 2008, 8, 5745-5760; DOI: 10.3390/s8095745 Mukherjee, S. (2007). Changes in Heliophysical parameter influence on Environment of the Earth. Bull.Astr.Soc.India (2007) 35,1-7 Mukherjee, S. (2007). Anomaly in Kp, E-flux and atmospheric temperaturebefore the earthquake of Sumatra on 26th December 2004. SUN and GEOSPHERE (The International Journal of Research and Applications Vol.2, No.2 ISSN1819-0839 http://www.stil.bas.bg/IHY/SUN_GEO.htm Mukherjee, S. (2006). Influence of Starflare on the Sun-Earth environment and its Possible relationship with snowfall. European Geological and Geophysical Sciences Letter, (Germany) EGU, Issue no.14 pp. 14-17, ISSN 1027-6343, www.the-eggs.org Mukherjee, S and Mukherjee A. (2002). Change in magnetic field: an early warning system to understand seismotectonics. Ed. K.G.Strassmeir (2002) pp139-142 1st Potsdam Thinkshop. AIP, An der Sternwarte 16,D-1442, Potsdam, Germany. ISBN 3-00-009862 ISSN: 0004-6337 Online ISSN: 1521-3994 http://www.aip.de
It is bizarre beyond belief that scientists give any credence to the GCM when their assumptions are so simplistic. Although one can admire the advances in mathematical simulation science that underlie the general circulation models upon which predictions of future climate are based, the more one studies climate science, the more complexity is revealed. The interaction between various atmospheric gases, the interaction between the biota, atmosphere and oceans, cloud formation, the effect of solar storms (sunspots), the mechanisms for shifts in oceanic currents are only some of the things that are modelled either with simplistic assumptions or not at all. The scope for error in running these models is huge and cannot even be reliably estimated. Basing decisions on their output would seem less reliable than consulting the Oracle at Delphi.