Thanks everyone. And you are right, it should be "The longer the timeframe and the lower the spatial resolution, the LESS likely the predictions will be affected by chaotic behavior."
For some reason I have a tendency to overlook rather glaring errors when proofreading my own writing... On Feb 15, 12:03 am, "Michael Tobis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "The longer the timeframe and the lower the spatial resolution, > the more likely the predictions will be affected by chaotic behavior." > > seems backwards. Chaos averages out on longer and larger scales, right? > > Otherwise I agree that this is well-written and very good. > > By the way I have a couple of related articles: > > http://www.pbs.org/kcet/wiredscience/blogs/2007/10/climate-chaos-and-...http://www.pbs.org/kcet/wiredscience/blogs/2007/11/chaos-part-2-chaos... > > probably not as well written as they are somewhat hasty... Maybe the > ideas will be useful just the same. > > mt --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of global environmental change. Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
