Climate computer models flawed


We weren't allowed to question the models because if it wasn't an immediate and pending disaster, there would be no need to turn over economic control.
This is an older one, but I wanted to make sure people saw it. Those global climate models aren't accurate. Emphasis added.

“The usual discussion is whether the climate model forecasts of Earth’s climate 100 years or so into the future are realistic,” said the lead author, Dr. David H. Douglass from the University of Rochester. “Here we have something more fundamental: Can the models accurately explain the climate from the recent past? “It seems that the answer is no.”

Scientists from Rochester, the University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH) and the University of Virginia compared the climate change “forecasts” from the 22 most widely-cited global circulation models with tropical temperature data collected by surface, satellite and balloon sensors. The models predicted that the lower atmosphere should warm significantly more than it actually did.

“Models are very consistent in forecasting a significant difference between climate trends at the surface and in the troposphere, the layer of atmosphere between the surface and the stratosphere,” said Dr. John Christy, director of UAH's Earth System Science Center. “The models forecast that the troposphere should be warming more than the surface and that this trend should be especially pronounced in the tropics.

“When we look at actual climate data, however, we do not see accelerated warming in the tropical troposphere. Instead, the lower and middle atmosphere are warming the same or less than the surface. For those layers of the atmosphere, the warming trend we see in the tropics is typically less than half of what the models forecast.”

The 22 climate models used in this study are the same models used by the UN Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change (IPCC), which recently shared a Nobel Peace Prize with former Vice President Al Gore.

Bingo!

The models aren't accurate. It's the same thing I have been saying for years.

If the computer models can't predict existing weather conditions, then why on Earth are we using the results of those models to justify a centrally planned economic disaster?

The answer is that it was never about the weather. Or the climate. Or human caused global warming.

It was always about control. It was about crushing dissent. It was about panicking you.

We weren't allowed to question the models because if it wasn't an immediate and pending disaster, there would be no need to turn over economic control.

There are scientists, well known, prominent scientists who dispute the global warming theories. But they aren't allowed to talk to you about that.

I am not saying that there aren't environmental problems. There are.

I am saying that the global warming movement subverted the entire environmental movement for their own ends. Goals that had absolutely nothing to do with environmentalism.

Hat tip Rite Wing Technopagan.

— NeoWayland

Posted: Fri - December 28, 2007 at 01:45 PM  Tag


 ◊  ◊   ◊  ◊ 

Random selections from NeoWayland's library


Pagan Vigil "Because LIBERTY demands more than just black or white"
© 2005 - 2009 All Rights Reserved