Climate Models: Worse Than Nothing?
When the history of climate modeling comes to be written in some distant future, the major story may well be how the easy, computable answer turned out to be the wrong one, resulting in overestimated warming and false scares from the enhanced (man-made) greenhouse effect.
Meanwhile, empirical and theoretical evidence is mounting toward this game-changing verdict despite the best efforts of the establishment to look the other way.
Consider a press release this month from the University of Colorado Boulder, “Warmer Clouds, Cooler Planet,” subtitled “precipitation-related ‘feedback’ cycle means models may overestimate warming.”
“Today’s climate models are showing more warmth than their predecessors,” the announcement begins.
Related: Climate change is real, and one consequence is an increase in vegetation.
What about the Greatest Criminal Fraud in History. 92 Trillion committed to the Fraud of the Paris Accord by Criminal Politicians by tax funded NGOs. Why no jail time.
A whole lot of BS and excuses to say they have been wrong and have no confidence future models will be any more accurate.
The whu who flu insanity is the result of computer models. need I say more?
Jasper AB will 100 F next week for a few days – queue up the Global Warming Articles in all Canadian Newspapers and on the CBC. Sorry, I’m American and don’t Celsius, Kelvin, Reaumur or Rankine. Besides 100 F sounds a lot hotter than 38 C even if it isn’t.
Sunday – 97
Monday – 99
Tuesday – 101
Wednesday – 103
Thursday – 100
No need for an apology Mr Galt, I too, grew up in feet and inches, and gained pounds and ounces as I grew. The Celcius and kilo whatevers threw a wrench in all our lives.
Introduced after I graduated, it has never stuck.
Hey Guys, they were so correct about the Coof numbers, they started a Global Depression. Climate Lockdowns are next. Klaus Schwab is a Prophet.
Climate stasis is an easily demonstrated myth, no evidence exists that climate ever stops changing.
Conservation Biology (theology) led the way decades ago (Northern Spotted Owl) as to how the scientific method could be short circuited to further a political agenda thanks to public funding of research. You take an hypothesis, easily conflatable with hysteria, ignore any attempt at testing and instead design all funded “research” at reinforcement of the hypothesis and simultaneously initiate campaigns to go directly to government action to ameliorate said crises. As an Orwellian bonus you brand all criticism as anti-science.
And as CO2 levels increase, the efficiency at which plants use H2O keeps pace: https://theconversation.com/rising-carbon-dioxide-is-making-the-worlds-plants-more-water-wise-79427
Slightly O/T: In the mid-19th century settlers in California reported park-like forests they could gallop through on horseback. Now Sierra Nevada forests are 80-400% denser. Given that tree mass is approx. 50% water, how much water that may otherwise flow downhill/downstream is consumed by this add’l tree growth–making one wonder, ‘If we thinned the forests to historical density, how much more meltwater would reach the reservoirs each spring?’ Could be interesting analysis–and the impact on fire intensity/forest vulnerability to insects/disease could be quite significant as well.
Also: Biden and the D’s keep touting ‘infrastructure’; last I checked, dams/reservoirs, piping/canals to move water, and reliable energy were all ‘infrastructure’. Was there a memo I missed?
yes, you missed a memo, where dams and reservoirs and anything man made that alters the environment is no longer “infrastructure” but the new definition is the idle supporters and cronies of Joe are the new “infrastructure”.
Also, if you look at various “renewable” energies, hydro isn’t included, despite the water cycle being the most renewable of all.
You sound like a global warmist ? What with your suggestion there was some kind of an “ideal” forest density that was somehow held in “natural” stasis before modern mankind. Same thing as the notion there is some kind of “ideal” “natural” temperature stasis that mankind has altered.
“When the history of climate modeling comes to be written…”
Who said its history will be written at all?
The final victory of fascism with Chinese characteristics will have a silver lining of a sort. You won’t hear another word about the environment, no matter how thoroughly Chinese industry poisons the planet.
Well … the woke immigrants are erasing American History … and altering it beyond any recognition. I thought the WINNERS were supposed to write history? Why are America’s LOSERS re-writing our history?
Eat more beef, not less, to fight climate change.
“Reducing beef consumption could cause more harm than good for Canada’s climate goals”
https://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2021/06/21/reducing-beef-consumption-could-cause-more-harm-than-good-for-canadas-climate-goals/
But … but … but … Bison droppings are naaaaaaatural. Cattle droppings are tOXic!!!
Right?
Herds of Bison in the millions … so thick the Great Plains turned black … had no impact whatsoever on climate. Their farts were sweetness and light. But … hundreds of thousands of cattle farts are going to destroy the planet.
Things you must believe to be a global warmist.
That’s because white people raised cattle but the buffalo ran free.
Modeling can be very useful, so long as the limitations of the models are acknowledged. When models do not predict outcomes that can be measured after the fact, such as drilling a dry hole in the oil and gas business, the models must be adjusted to accommodate the new data. The climate charlatans do not operate in this fashion. When the climate models do not accurately predict results that can be measured, they fudge the data set inputs rather than adjust the models. Fraudulent science by definition.
Second link appears to be thoroughly borked.
Climate change is real, and one consequence is an increase in vegetation.
Link didn’t work for me. Here’s the URL:
https://twitter.com/mattwridley/status/1407789539213598721
in physics, you have: “first assume a spherical cow of equal density….”
in climate science you have: “First assume a spherical earth, with equal distribution of humidity…”
and you just go down hill from there
For well over a decade now, I have been referring to climate computer models as the crystal balls of the 21st century.
The seer/scientist just has to hover their hands over the ball/keyboard and then tell us whatever fortune/future they decide to make for us. Using a computer to defraud people instead of a ball to defraud people is still fraud. But hey, fraud is what leftist activists do best.
And…. pronouncing nothing more than computer models and consensus as “settled science” is the most unscientific act I have ever witnessed. Manmade global warming IS the conspiracy theory, the bigotries and mistruths it’s faithful exhibit daily prove they have no real supporting science to trumpet. I don’t believe they have a single repeatable experiment that conclusively demonstrates their claims. Not one. They can’t even point to a single success from DECADES of predictions…. because it has always all been a big fat propaganda lie!
I have also long been saying that, for me, the science won’t be settled until fraud and corruption charges are filed against this conspiracy’s worst actors.
What the climate modelers didn’t function into their models is the vast amounts of water we are artificially injecting into the lower atmosphere by using industrial irrigation. One only has to look at a Google Earth site to see the vast areas of the planet that have been made agriculturally productive through industrial irrigation. Areas that until this past century had been deserts or arid areas agriculturally unproductive for millennia. Part of the reason that we have 7 billion people on earth is that fact that we have overcome natures response to culling the herd by creating famines. There are still areas that experience famines throughout the world but through our human compassion we send foreign aid to these areas periodically which allows them to exist. In the past famine in these areas reduced the population naturally, allowing only the strong to survive. Our compassion will be our undoing.
The Sound Of
SettledSelected Science.There. Fixed it.
The climate models have performed brilliantly at disproving CAGW.
“The media and scientists have a history of getting the consensus wrong. Harpers, Time and Newsweek all ran stories about the climate emergency. Newsweek ran covers stating the oil companies and America’s capitalist lifestyle were destroying the planet. This sounds like the media today. Scientists were all agreeing that man-made climate change would reduce agricultural output for the rest of the century. Climate change wasn’t the word used back in the 1970s to describe the crisis. The term was global cooling.”
In the late 90s and early 2000s the terminology switched to global warming. This is the opposite of the problem predicted years earlier. How can we trust science to always be correct when they were completely wrong? Climate change is the popular term now. It seems convenient that it encompasses blaming humans on warming and cooling.”
Climate change policies only serve to expand government power, increase regulations and taxes. The energy companies will pass the cost along to the consumer. This only can hurt middle class and lower income citizens.”
https://medium.com/discourse/a-brief-history-of-incorrect-climate-change-predictions-3664e4054ee6
The apparatchiks don’t care. It gives them the power they lust. A crisis is a terrible thing to waste, especially a fabricated one.
I do my part to sequester carbon: I toss all my waste paper into the landfill.
Anyone who is my age with an IQ above 100 understands that the climate is way beyond our control.
Exactly right. That many people ( some supposedly smart) believe otherwise is just amazing. Propaganda of course pushes the narrstive along, but surely just knowing how small our CO2 contribution is, compared to natural CO2 from volcanos, etc, (We are 3.9% of the .04 percent total CO2 in the atmosphere ) makes the claim of man-made made global warming just absurd. Most people are not paying sufficient attention.
The original model by Arrhenius was probably the best one, the one that could be written on a postcard. The problem is that it didn’t predict enough warming to scare the bejeebus out of people. It seems to be holding up though still. It’s not hard to see why Wikipedia declined to include his prediction.
The Wikipedia article is flogging the “runaway greenhouse effect” on Venus that “boiled the oceans” there. Except that Earth already had CO2 of 3000 ppm, which nobody expects to see again, and no runaway happened. This kind of transparent dishonesty is what is destroying the credibility of ‘climate science’