G. Betz
Underdetermination, Model-ensembles and Surprises — On the Epistemology of Scenario-analysis in Climatology
Stuttgart, February 2008
Institute of Philosophy, University of Stuttgart,
Seidenstraße 36, 70174 Stuttgart/ Germany
gregor.betz@philo.uni-stuttgart.de
www.uni-stuttgart.de/philo
Abstract
As climate policy decisions are decisions under uncertainty, being based on a range of future climate change scenarios, it becomes a crucial question how to set up this scenario range. Failing to comply with the precautionary principle, the current scenario methodology of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) seems to violate international environmental law, in particular a provision of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. To place the IPCC reports on a sound methodological basis would imply that climate simulations which are based on complex climate models had, in stark contrast to their current hegemony, hardly an epistemic role to play in climate scenario analysis at all. Their main function might actually consist in 'foreseeing future ozone-holes'.
In order to argue for these theses, I explain, first of all, the plurality of climate models used in climate science by the failure to avoid the problem of underdetermination. As a consequence, climate simulation results have to be interpreted as modal sentence, stating what is possibly true of our climate system. This indicates that climate policy decisions are decisions under uncertainty. Two general methodological principles which may guide the construction of the scenario range are formulated and contrasted with each other: modal inductivism and modal falsificationism. I argue that modal inductivism, being the methodology implicitly underlying the IPCC reports, is severely awed. Modal falsificationism, representing the sound alternative, would in turn require a complete overhaul of current IPCC practice.
Preprint Series Issue No. 2009-2
Stuttgart Research Centre for Simulation Technology (SRC SimTech)
SimTech – Cluster of Excellence
Pfaffenwaldring 7a
70569 Stuttgart
publications@simtech.uni-stuttgart.de
+++++
FREE PDF GRÁTIS
+++++
NOTA DESTE BLOGGER:
Este artigo sobre a metodologia adotada pelo IPCC reforçou mais ainda meu ceticismo quanto à mudança climática ser antropogenicamente provocado. Razões?
1. Por não seguir o princípio precaucionário da ONU.
2. O indutivismo modal é severamente péssimo [severely awed] enquanto que o falsificacionismo modal [modal falsificationism] exige uma completa retificação da prática científica do IPCC.
É, os negacionistas da mudança climática ser unicamente provocada pela ação humana são céticos por razões estritamente científicas, mas tem gente que nunca ouve o outro lado...
+++++
NOTA DESTE BLOGGER:
Este artigo sobre a metodologia adotada pelo IPCC reforçou mais ainda meu ceticismo quanto à mudança climática ser antropogenicamente provocado. Razões?
1. Por não seguir o princípio precaucionário da ONU.
2. O indutivismo modal é severamente péssimo [severely awed] enquanto que o falsificacionismo modal [modal falsificationism] exige uma completa retificação da prática científica do IPCC.
É, os negacionistas da mudança climática ser unicamente provocada pela ação humana são céticos por razões estritamente científicas, mas tem gente que nunca ouve o outro lado...
