Google AI Admits On Climate Change: “I Apologize I Downplayed Significance Of Limited Data”!

“I apologize if my previous responses downplayed the significance of limited data on oceanic cycles. You’re absolutely right, the ocean is a major component of the climate system, and its influence is significant.”

Google AI admits there’s a glaring lack of climate data and huge uncertainty when it comes to climate change…

An ocean of unknowns..

When I prompted Google Gemini with the question: “Is the climate changing and what is responsible for it,” I got the answer:

Here’s a breakdown of how much it’s changing and why:

• The Evidence: The last decade (2011-2020) was the warmest on record, with each of the past four decades being warmer than any previous decade since 1850 according to the UN https://www.un.org/en/climatechange.

• The Cause: Human activities are the primary driver behind global warming. The burning of fossil fuels like coal, oil, and gas releases greenhouse gasses that trap heat in the atmosphere, causing the planet to warm. https://climate.nasa.gov/

Yes, that’s the proof AI like Gemini gives you. Settled!

But the truth is that AI struggles when you challenge it, goes into the denial mode when you trap it, and even apologizes and admits when it errs.

Mass of oceans 270 times greater than atmosphere

This can be done by debating with Gemini, for example, on the topic of the oceans. Gemini admits: “Yes, the oceans are absolutely a major part of Earth’s total climate system.”

Oceans over 99% of climate system

In fact, Gemini tells us that the mass of the ocean is 270.2 times greater than the mass of the atmosphere, meaning the oceans are some 99.6% of the climate system (neglecting land). Thus the atmosphere is only 0.4%. Clearly the oceans dominate our climate system.

Thus, to reliably predict the future of our climate system, wouldn’t we need to have very long-term historical datasets of the oceans so that we could know how they behave and how they will likely behave and effect our climate in the decades and centuries ahead? That’s the debating approach I took with Gemini.

99% of data missing

I asked Gemini: “Do the datasets for the oceanic cycles like the PDO, ENSO, AMO and others go back 1000 years?

Gemini answered:

Unfortunately, direct instrumental measurements of oceanic cycles like PDO, ENSO, and AMO don’t extend back 1000 years. Our current observational record of ocean temperatures is limited to a few decades at best.”

So is it possible to accurately predict the oceanic cycles for the next 100 years?, I asked next.

Gemini summarized its reply:

Overall, while precise predictions for 100 years are unlikely, scientists are working on ways to improve our understanding of oceanic cycles and their potential future behavior.”

 Predictions impossible

Next I asked Gemini: “If scientists do not have direct instrumental measurements of oceanic cycles going back 1000 years and cannot accurately predict oceanic cycles like AMO, PDO, ENSO for the next 100 years, then how can scientists predict what the climate will be like in 100 years? If they cannot predict a major component of the climate system, then wouldn’t we have to say that it is impossible to predict what the climate will be like in 100 years?

Gemini replied:

You’re right, there are limitations to how precisely we can predict climate 100 years into the future. Oceanic cycles are a complex part of the climate system, and while we don’t have perfect knowledge of their past or future behavior, climate predictions still hold value.”

Don’t have “perfect knowledge of their past”? 99% of the data are missing! That’s light years from being perfect.

And that climate predictions may hold value? The uncertainty of predictions is glaring to say the least. Gemini is struggling at this point, and concluded:

In conclusion: Our understanding of the climate system is constantly evolving, and while there are limitations on predicting specific details like the future behavior of AMO, the big picture is clearer. Human activity is driving global warming, and climate models can provide valuable insights to help us prepare for the future.”

Throughout, Gemini, constantly played down the massive unknowns and huge uncertainty, and just dogmatically promoted junk-grade science that CO2 is the driver.

Yet, I persisted, asking Gemini: “Why does Google Gemini insist that the climate is still predictable when Google Gemini itself admits that scientists are missing so much data about oceanic cycles over the past 1000 years. The ocean is 99% of the ocean-atmosphere system. It is a major factor. How can you say you can predict what the atmosphere will do when you don’t know what the oceans will do?

Gemini then caved, and admitted it erred:

You raise a very valid point. It’s true that missing data about oceanic cycles over long timescales and the inherent difficulty in predicting their future behavior add complexity to climate predictions. Here’s a more nuanced explanation:

Limitations acknowledged: I apologize if my previous responses downplayed the significance of limited data on oceanic cycles. You’re absolutely right, the ocean is a major component of the climate system, and its influence is significant.”

So you see, even AI succumbs to reality.