Climate Modeling vs Climate Reality

Climate Model Predictions

The next time you are faced with a Global Warming Alarmist – dare I say I repeat myself- you may ask them if they have evidence that would suggest their models are accurately reflecting reality.

The chart above from Dr. Roy Spencer via CoyoteBlog suggests that the models are off.

As Coyote mentions:

The warming from manmade CO2 without positive feedbacks would be about 1.3C per doubling of CO2 concentrations, a fraction of the 3-10C predicted by these climate models.  If the climate, like most other long-term stable natural systems, is dominated by negative feedbacks, the sensitivity would be likely less than 1C.  Either way, the resulting predicted warming from manmade CO2 over the rest of this century would likely be less than 1 degree C.

Don’t fall for the trap the Left will try to spring on you – namely accusing you of denying climate change.  Certainly the climate is changing.  And certainly:

  1. Green house gases cause warming that might not otherwise have taken place
  2. CO2 is a green house gas
  3. Man has added to the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere
  4. It is reasonable to assume that man has warmed the earth to a level that it might not otherwise have been at

It’s not global warming that I deny, it’s the Alarmist nature of the disciples of the religion that I disagree with.

One response to “Climate Modeling vs Climate Reality

  1. A licensed mechanical engineer (retired) who has been researching this issue for 6 years, and in the process discovered what actually caused global warming, has four papers on the web, that you may find of interest. They provide some eye-opening insight on the cause of change to average global temperature and why it has stopped warming. The papers are straight-forward calculations (not just theory) using readily available data up to May, 2013.

    The first one is ‘Global warming made simple’ at http://lowaltitudeclouds.blogspot.com It shows, with simple thermal radiation calculations, how a tiny change in the amount of low-altitude clouds could account for half of the average global temperature change in the 20th century, and what could have caused that tiny cloud change. (The other half of the temperature change is from net average natural ocean oscillation which is dominated by the PDO)

    The second paper is ‘Natural Climate change has been hiding in plain sight’ at http://climatechange90.blogspot.com/2013/05/natural-climate-change-has-been.html . This paper presents a simple equation that, using a single external forcing, calculates average global temperatures since they have been accurately measured world wide (about 1895) with an accuracy of 90%, irrespective of whether the influence of CO2 is included or not. The equation uses a proxy which is the time-integral of sunspot numbers. A graph is included which shows the calculated trajectory overlaid on measurements.

    Change to the level of atmospheric CO2 had no significant effect on average global temperature.

    The time-integral of sunspot numbers since 1610 which is shown at http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2010/01/blog-post_23.html corroborates the significance of this factor.

    A third paper, ‘The End of Global Warming’ at http://endofgw.blogspot.com/ expands recent (since 1996) measurements and includes a graph showing the growing separation between the rising CO2 and not-rising average global temperature.

    The fourth paper http://consensusmistakes.blogspot.com/ exposes some of the mistakes that have been made by the ‘Consensus’ and the IPCC

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *