Predictivism and old evidence

a critical look at climate model tuning

verfasst von

Mathias Frisch

Abstract

Many climate scientists have made claims that may suggest that evidence used in tuning or calibrating a climate model cannot be used to evaluate the model. By contrast, the philosophers Katie Steele and Charlotte Werndl have argued that, at least within the context of Bayesian confirmation theory, tuning is simply an instance of hypothesis testing. In this paper I argue for a weak predictivism and in support of a nuanced reading of climate scientists’ concerns about tuning: there are cases, model-tuning among them, in which predictive successes are more highly confirmatory of a model than accommodation of evidence.

Externe Organisation(en)

University of Maryland

Typ

Artikel

Journal

European Journal for Philosophy of Science

Band

5

Seiten

171-190

Anzahl der Seiten

20

ISSN

1879-4912

Publikationsdatum

01.05.2015

Publikationsstatus

Veröffentlicht

Peer-reviewed

Ja

ASJC Scopus Sachgebiete

Wissenschaftsgeschichte und -philosophie

Ziele für nachhaltige Entwicklung

SDG 13 – Klimaschutzmaßnahmen

Elektronische Version(en)

https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-015-0110-4 (Zugang: Geschlossen)