2 Comments

As a non-scientist and hopeless mathematician, I am thankful to you for your clear explanation of stochastics. A chink of light has opened for me. I think that the deterministic way of analysing climate (past, present and future) is based on an overwhelming anthropomorphic arrogance. This arrogance imposes itself on sensible science. Sensible science collects the data nature provided, provides and will provide and allows the resulting evidence to speak for itself (via stochasitics for the mathematically inclined) and via common sense for the rest!

Expand full comment

I am thankful to you, Ariane, and very glad and flattered that you found that my post offers a "chink of light".

Your comment reminded me Laplace's aphorism: “probability theory is, au fond, nothing but common sense reduced to calculus”. Nb., Laplace was the greatest determinist in history (cf. Laplace's demon), yet he appreciated probability theory and greatly contributed to its development.

You may find additional information on that issue in my paper "A random walk on water", https://www.itia.ntua.gr/923/

Expand full comment