Any more thoughts on what you thought sarcasm?
Pho Huc wrote on Sep 27
th, 2017 at 4:11am:
The most important of these is that satellite drag analyses under solar minimum conditions have measured density change of about −5% per decade near 400 km altitude, while model simulations of upper atmosphere cooling due to anthropogenic increases in carbon dioxide and other trace gases have predicted about half that rate.
So their model was wrong. They don't seem to have that equation right.
Pho Huc wrote on Sep 27
th, 2017 at 4:11am:
For solar moderate and maximum conditions, agreement is better.
Confirmation the model is not right,
Pho Huc wrote on Sep 27
th, 2017 at 4:11am:
. Therefore, we have performed new, fully 3-D simulations, using the National Center for Atmospheric Research thermosphere-ionosphere-mesosphere electrodynamics general circulation model, to better quantify secular change rates at various levels of solar activity. These simulations use a 12 year baseline (approximately one solar cycle) in order to more directly compare with measured rates. Our new findings are in better agreement with observations for solar minimum conditions, approximately −5% per decade at 400 km, and are also still in reasonable agreement at solar maximum, approximately −2% per decade.
So they used a new more powerful computer. the results -
Pho Huc wrote on Sep 27
th, 2017 at 4:11am:
Our new findings are in better agreement with observations for solar minimum conditions
Note - not good agreement, merely better agreement.
So they still don't seem to have the equation right. Is it because there are one or more unknown parameters, which remain unaccounted? What effect would any of these unknown parameters (if they exist) have on each other and on the whole?
A more powerful computer won't necessarily give the right answer, only faster.
There are simply too many unknowns.
from the paper -
"Since the subsequent development of solar cycle 24 has been very weak, this raises the possibility of gradual change in solar forcing, both from energetic photon radiation and from magnetic variation that could confound attempts to quantify anthropogenic change.
There is no known reason to suspect that this was an issue prior to 2007, during the period that most of the above analyses occurred. Nevertheless, this is a problem that increases the uncertainty on the observational inferences of secular trends and demands careful monitoring in the future."
But of course there is always the possibility of unknown reasons.