Scott Armstrong of the Wharton School challenges Al Gore $20,000 that he will be able to make more accurate forecasts of annual mean temperatures than those that can be produced by climate models. Scott Armstrong’s forecasts will be based on the naive (no-change) model; that is, the forecasts would be the same as the most recent year prior to the forecasts. The money will be placed in a Charitable Trust to be established at a brokerage house. The charity designated by the winner will receive the total value in the fund when the official award is made at the annual International Symposium on Forecasting in 2018.
The current status of the Challenge:
- "Gore proposes new condition on climate forecasting challenge . . . Armstrong accepts and awaits a reply"
From "Global Warming: Forecasts by Scientists versus Scientific Forecasts" by Scott Armstrong:
In 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Working Group One, a panel of experts established by the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme, issued its Fourth Assessment Report.
The forecasts in the Report were not the outcome of scientific procedures. In effect, they were the opinions of scientists transformed by mathematics and obscured by complex writing. Research on forecasting has shown that experts’ predictions are not useful in situations involving uncertainly and complexity. We have been unable to identify any scientific forecasts of global warming. Claims that the Earth will get warmer have no more credence than saying that it will get colder.
Another presentation by Scott Armstrong, with stronger evidence than the one from IESE:
- "Global Warming: Forecasts by Scientists Versus Scientific Forecasts" (PDF)
The youtubes:
- Dr. Scott Armstrong on Climate Forecasting - Part I
- Dr. Scott Armstrong on Climate Forecasting - Part II
- Dr. Scott Armstrong on Climate Forecasting - Part III
No comments:
Post a Comment