Links to Pat Frank's papers and posts
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feart.2019.00223/full
(the paper). https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2019.00223
https://meteo.lcd.lu/globalwarming/Frank/propagation_of_error_poster_AGU2013.pdf
(Invited poster at AGU 2013 Fall Meeting, San Francisco)
https://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/a-climate-of-belief/
(article on Skeptic, 2008)
POSTs
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/09/19/emulation-4-w-m-long-wave-cloud-forcing-error-and-meaning/
(September 19, 2019)
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/09/07/propagation-of-error-and-the-reliability-of-global-air-temperature-projections-mark-ii/
(September 7, 2019)
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/10/23/propagation-of-error-and-the-reliability-of-global-air-temperature-projections/
(October 23, 2017)
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/05/20/do-climate-projections-have-any-physical-meaning/
(May 20, 2015)
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/02/24/are-climate-modelers-scientists/
(February 24, 2015)
At Roy Spencer's site
At this site, Frank wrote, replying to Math:
Pat Frank says:
September 13, 2019 at 7:39 PM
Math, I just show that the theory error manifest in long wave cloud
forcing error propagates through the sequence of step-wise calculations
that comprise a climate simulation.
The annual per-model average error, (+/-)4 W/m^2, is a model calibration error.
There are two elements to it. One is that it is (+/-)114 times larger than
the annual change in CO2 forcing.
Second is that it is a theory error that enters every single calculational
step of a step-wise simulation. When it is propagated through those steps,
it grows so large that the projected air temperature is physically meaningless.
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2019/09/a-stove-top-analogy-to-climate-models/
(Roy Spencer's comment on Frank's paper, September 13, 2019)
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2019/09/additional-comments-on-the-frank-2019-propagation-of-error-paper/
(September 12, 2019; 0900 CDT)
Page written: September 20, 2019. Last updated: September 20,
2019