Read here. We have been highly critical of climate models as they have failed every major test they have been presented with - simply put, they can't predict and should not be relied on by policy makers. The tsunami models are multiple degrees less complex than climate models and yet they too failed big-time after the major quake off Chile. These tsunami models had just one assignment and they still couldn't get it done.
All these state-of-the-art models are really state-of-the-joke money machines for the researchers who claim they can actually predict with these modeling techniques, which amount to nothing more than complex spreadsheets on steroids.
And after the tsunami model failures, it didn't take long for excuses to be made and the whining to start for more expenditures - that's a sure money prediction in all these type of events.
""There are all sorts of assumptions that we make in trying to figure out how big the waves are going to be. If we can avoid some of those assumptions, maybe we can do a better job,"...."If this event happened tomorrow, even with this knowledge, we would be forced to do the exact same thing."....Those models could be more accurate if scientists had more deep-water sensors and could build coastal inundation models for vast parts of the Pacific Rim where the topography hasn't yet been well-surveyed [Editor's translation: "give me more money, now"]....Because complete data doesn't exist for every coastal area, scientists must play it safe in their wave predictions, he said...."Even for Hawaii, we only have a forecast for less than 10 locations. We don't have inundation models for every coastal point in Hawaii, and it's the same story for the U.S. mainland,"
