Climate, Computers, and the Human Element

Celebrating teamwork, science, and individual excellence.

I value teams. Not necessarily sport teams but teams that get jobs done. One of the most rewarding teams for me was the Puma Helicopter detachments I served with on Navy Military Sealift Command ships.  The detachments were comprised of five pilots and three mechanics on a ship of a couple hundred mariner teammates.

Being part of a job well done was its own reward. A mission flying day started with an important act required by law. The lead engineer would bring the Captain the aircraft logbook and tell him the aircraft was airworthy. The Captain would put his signature next to the mechanics asserting he had made himself aware of all factors affecting the safety of the upcoming flight.

This ceremony is important. It is not only a legal requirement, but a bond of trust between professionals never lost on me the thousands of times I participated in it.

From the early 1970s and for the next 50 years the science community has asked us to trust their computer-based climate projections. They have been unsuccessful. I wonder why?

The transition from human computers to machine computers is one of the many themes running in the background of the movie, “Hidden Figures”. Science in general, and space flight in particular, rely on mathematical equations that precisely represent reality. And, when accurate numbers are entered into equations, and the equations are executed diligently, you can predict future outcomes precisely.  Back in 1962 NASA was transitioning from large teams of human computers to IBM computers to crunch critical numbers. Before John Glen’s record-breaking orbital flight, space trajectories were computed by hand. The best human computer on the NASA team was Katherine Johnson, a black woman. Her story and the story of other black women computers, who dealt with discrimination made the movie “Hidden Figures” a compelling story.

But to me, a pilot, it was the interaction of John Glenn with the team led by Katherine Johnson I found most intriguing. Astronaut Glenn was given the trajectory numbers from the IBM computers prior to his Friendship 7 space flight. He was not confident in these early mechanical computers. He asked MS Johnson to run the numbers manually. She crunched the numbers, verifying them. Now confident, John Glenn strapped the Friendship 7 rocket to his rear end and launched into space and the history books.

Today computer programs run in the background affecting nearly everything we do. We are often oblivious. Human computers no longer exist. The machine has eliminated these careers. For the most part this transition to trust the computer machine has been accepted. The exception is climate predictions. One documented reason trust in these “climate models” is weak is because Machiavellian public opinion manipulators hired by the fossil fuel companies undercut our faith in these computer models.

Another reason is often we have not met the people who build the supercomputers, build the equations, and analyze the data. The scientists and engineers like computers have, for too long, worked invisibly in the background. Would our confidence in the scientist’s models be greater if we had a human to human interaction?

That is why I have traveled to many climate presentations featuring a climate scientist. At every presentation 95% of what they speak about, I am already aware of. So why go? It is because I get to visit with them after each presentation. It is a short visit, but I get to shake their hand and look them in the eye. It is like the lead engineer bringing the aircraft log to me.  I make a human to human judgement.  Do I trust them?

So far, I have never found a climate scientist who does not instill in me confidence in their work, and more importantly, in their character.

But how do YOU know their work is trustworthy? Recently a team of prestigious climate scientists reviewed the climate models and their predictions for the last 50 years. Were the predictions accurate?  If you wish to read their evaluation then search, “Evaluating the Performance of Past Climate Model Projections” in the American Geophysical Union’s publication, “Geophysical Research Letters”. Here is the summary paragraph from the report:

“We find that climate models published over the past five decades were generally quite accurate in predicting global warming in the years after publication, particularly when accounting for differences between modeled and actual changes in atmospheric CO₂ and other climate drivers. This research should help resolve public confusion around the performance of past climate modeling efforts and increases our confidence that models are accurately projecting global warming.”

 Perhaps it is time we take a look at the individuals who make up the climate team, the patriots whose advice we can trust to bring our earth to a stable climate landing? It has been rewarding for me. I hope you find these people as genuine as I have.

Note: Michigan Tech has invited Climate Scientist Joellen Russell to address us on International Water Day the 23^rd and 24^th of March.  You, too, can listen to an expert, meet them, and draw your own conclusions.

Inspiration for this column: Katherine Johnson, NASA legend, who died last week at 101.