Image talk:Global Warming Predictions Map 2.jpg

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I wouldn't call a computer run with one scenario a prediction. I suggest NPOV calculation. The biggest unknown is the emissionscenario.

EG We predict this century a big earthquake in california, with uncertainties, based on observed historic statistics. Hans Erren 09:45, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Given some set of assumptions, the computer model makes a prediction. I don't really see a problem with that logic. As a drop-in replacement "calculation" is not great either, because "global warming calculations" fails to capture that the figure is about what may happen in the future. That a single computer model generally fails to give an uncertainty range is of course a limitation of the model, but the description also shows a comparison to similar average results across a variety of models and places the average warming of this result in the proper IPCC context, which should be enough to get a rough feel of the uncertainty. Dragons flight 12:19, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

OK then if you insist Hans Erren 15:03, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I've moved this image here from Image:Global_Warming_Predictions_Map.jpg, to try and get around a problem with some adblockers. See Talk:Main Page and User talk:Raul654. — sjorford++ 10:49, 25 June 2006 (UTC)