A chaotic system is generally defined to mean one in which small changes to the inputs lead to large variations in the outputs. So your reply noting that it’s only a 1% change doesn’t contradict the previous statements.

It depends on the system, I’m not familiar enough with climate science to state anything about the particular case at hand, but chaotic systems can be deterministic.

>It depends on the system

Sure, which makes the blanket statement the GP made incorrect:

>Putting more energy into a meta-stable chaotic system will greatly increase the number of extremes across the board

I think you’re being a bit pedantic, in context GP was clearly referring to the climate, not making blanket statements about all chaotic systems.

In either case, a 1% change in energy input is always going to be a big deal with regards to an energy dependent chaotic system.

You're being pedantic.

Chaotic systems, in essence, are known for its unpredictability. Watch this to get an idea: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEjZd-AvPco