Are climate models credible worlds? Prospects and limitations of possibilistic climate prediction

European Journal for Philosophy of Science

Volumn 5, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 191-215

  Betz, Gregor ^a  

^a KARLSRUHE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Climate model; Credible world; Idealisation; Possibility; Prediction; Representation; Scenario; Uncertainty

Indexed keywords

EID: 84929071106     PISSN: 18794912     EISSN: 18794920     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s13194-015-0108-y     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Betz, G. (2007). Probabilities in climate policy advice: a critical comment. Climatic Change, 85(1–2), 1–9.
2. Betz, G. (2009). What range of future scenarios should climate policy be based on? Modal falsificationism and its limitations. Philosophia Naturalis, 46(1), 133–158.
3. Betz, G. (2010). What’s the worst case? The methodology of possibilistic prediction. Analyse und Kritik, 32(1), 87–106.
4. Carter, T., Perry, M., Harasawa, H., & Nishioka, S. (1994). IPCC technical guidelines for assessing climate change impacts and adaptations. University College London (London, UK), National Center for Environmental Studies (Tsukuba, Japan).
5. de Donato Rodríguez, X., & Zamora Bonilla J.P. (2009). Credibility, idealisation, and model building: an inferential approach. Erkenntnis, 70(1), 101–118.
6. Deutsch, H. (1990). Real possibility. Noûs, 24(5), 751–755.
7. Fischedick, M., Schaeffer, R., Adedoyin, A., Akai, M., Bruckner, T., Clarke, L., Krey, V., et al. (2011). Mitigation potential and costs. In O. Edenhofer, R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, K. Seyboth, P. Matschoss, S. Kadner, T. Zwickel et al. (Eds.), IPCC special report on renewable energy sources and climate change mitigation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
8. Flato, G., Marotzke, J., Abiodun, B., Braconnot, P., Chou, S. C., Collins, W., Cox, P., et al. (2013). Evaluation of climate models. In T.F. Stocker, D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex, & P.M. Midgley (Eds.), The physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change (pp. 741–866). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9. Frigg, R., Bradley, S., Machete, R.L., & Smith, L.A. (2013). Probabilistic forecasting: why model imperfection is a poison pill. In H. Andersen, D. Dieks, W.J. Gonzalez, T. Uebel, & G. Wheeler (Eds.), New challenges to philosophy of science. The philosophy of science in a European perspective (pp. 479-491). Dordrecht: Springer.
10. Frigg, R., Smith, L.A., & Stainforth, D.A. (2014). The myopia of imperfect climate models: the case of UKCP09. Philosophy of Science, 80(5), 886–897.
11. Gibbs, B. (1970). Real possibility. American Philosophical Quarterly, 7(4), 340–348.
12. Giere, R. N. (1988). Explaining science: a cognitive approach. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
13. Grüne-Yanoff, T. (2009). Learning from minimal economic models. Erkenntnis, 70(1), 81– 99.
14. Grüne-Yanoff, T. (2014). Appraising models nonrepresentationally. Philosophy of Science, 80(5), 850–861.
15. Hansson, S.O. (1997). The limits of precaution. Foundations of Science, 2(2), 293–306.
16. Hansson, S.O. (2011). Coping with the unpredictable effects of future technologies. Philosophy & Technology, 24(2), 137–149.
17. Hartshorne, C. (1963). Real possibility. The Journal of Philosophy, 60(21), 593–605.
18. Katzav, J. (2014). The epistemology of climate models and some of its implications for climate science and the philosophy of science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 46(2), 228–238.
19. Katzav, J., Dijkstra, H.A., & de Laat, A.T.J. (2012). Assessing climate model projections: State of the art and philosophical reflections. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 43(4), 258–276.
20. Kunreuther, H., Heal, G., Allen, M., Edenhofer, O., Field, C.B., & Yohe, G. (2013). Risk management and climate change. Nature Climate Change, 3(5), 447–450.
21. Lempert, R.J., Popper, S.W., & Bankes, S.C. (2002). Confronting surprise. Social Science Computer Review, 20(4), 420–440.
22. Lempert, R.J., Popper, S.W., & Bankes, S.C. (2003). Shaping the next one hundred years: new methods for quantitative, long-term policy analysis. Santa Monica: RAND.
23. Levi, I. (1980). The enterprise of knowledge. An essay on knowledge, credal probability and chance. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
24. Lloyd, E.A. (2010). Confirmation and robustness of climate models. Philosophy of Science, 77(5), 971–984.
25. Lorenzen, P. (1987). Lehrbuch der konstruktiven Wissenschaftstheorie. Mannheim, Wien, Zrich: BI-Wissenschaftsverlag.
26. McInernery, D., Lempert, R., & Keller, K. (2012). What are robust strategies in the face of uncertain climate threshold responses? Climatic Change, 112(3–4), 547–568.
27. Meinshausen, M., Meinshausen, N., Hare, W., Raper, S. C. B., Frieler, K., Knutti, R., Frame, D. J., & Allen, M. R. (2009). Greenhouse-gas emission targets for limiting global warming to 2 degrees C. Nature, 458(7242), 1158–1162.
28. Meinshausen, M., Raper, S.C.B., & Wigley, T.M.L. (2011). Emulating coupled atmosphere-ocean and carbon cycle models with a simpler model, MAGICC6-Part 1: model description and calibration. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 11(4), 1417–1456.
29. Parker, W.S. (2009). Confirmation and adequacy-for-purpose in climate modelling. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society,83(1), 233–249.
30. Parker, W.S. (2010a). Predicting weather and climate: uncertainty, ensembles and probability. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 41(3), 263–272.
31. Parker, W.S. (2010b). Whose probabilities? Predicting climate change with ensembles of models. Philosophy of Science, 77(5), 985–997.
32. Schmidt, G., & Sherwood, S. (2015). A practical philosophy of complex climate modelling. European Journal for Philosophy of Science. Early on-line, doi: 10.1007/s13194-014-0102-9.
33. Shue, H. (2010). Deadly delays, saving opportunities: creating a more dangerous world? In S.M. Gardiner, D. Jamieson, H. Shue (Eds.), Climate ethics: essential readings (pp. 146–162). New York: Oxford University Press.
34. Stainforth, D.A., Allen, M.R., Tredger, E.R., & Smith, L.A. (2007). Confidence, uncertainty and decision-support relevance in climate predictions. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A-Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences, 365(1857), 2145–2161.
35. Stainforth, D.A., & Smith, L.A. (2012). Clarify the limits of climate models. Nature, 489(7415), 208.
36. Steele, K. (2013). Interview with David Stainforth. The Reasoner, 7(2), 15–18.
37. Strevens, M. (2008). Depth: an account of scientific explanation. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
38. Sugden, R. (2009). Credible worlds, capacities and mechanisms. Erkenntnis, 70(1), 3–27.
39. Weisberg, M. (2007). Three kinds of idealization. The Journal of Philosophy, 104(12), 639–659.
40. Winsberg, E. (2006). Models of success vs. the success of models: reliability without truth. Synthese, 152(1), 1–19.