Tuesday, February 11, 2014

Global Warming: not as bad as predicted

Global Warming fears are driven by climate models, which are wrong and getting much wronger:
I’ve updated our comparison of 90 climate models versus observations for global average surface temperatures through 2013, and we still see that >95% of the models have over-forecast the warming trend since 1979, whether we use their own surface temperature dataset (HadCRUT4), or our satellite dataset of lower tropospheric temperatures (UAH):

Whether humans are the cause of 100% of the observed warming or not, the conclusion is that global warming isn’t as bad as was predicted. That should have major policy implications…assuming policy is still informed by facts more than emotions and political aspirations. [emphasis mine - Borepatch]
The green dotted line is the surface temperature record; the blue dotted line is the satellite record.  The other lines are the 90 climate model predictions.  You'll note that only two or three track near the observed data.  The others are so far off that the average is 0.3°C higher than observed.  That's the average of the model projections - off by 60% over the course of 30 years.

As Dr. Spencer wryly observes, 95% of the models agree that the measured data must be wrong.

This is important because all of the projected catastrophes - rising sea levels, desertification, extinctions, etc - rely on much higher temperatures.  Up to 5°C is projected in the worst case scenarios, but all of those are based on these models (you can see them in the graph, the lines that are highest in the plots).  Those worst case scenario model projections already are saying that warming would be 0.8°C since 1983 - basically the entire warming observed in the entire twentieth century.  It's just not happening.

The models are simply wrong.  All of them.


Dan Pangburn said...

The two primary drivers of average global temperatures explain the reported up and down measurements since before 1900 with 90% accuracy and provide credible estimates back to the low temperatures of the Little Ice Age (1610).

CO2 change is NOT one of the drivers.

The drivers are given at


which includes eye opening graphs and a plethora of links and sub-links to the credible data sources that were used.

vizslak7 said...

Lower than expected and even with fudged data. The satellite data show NO warming for the past 17.5 years.

Borepatch said...

vizslak7, I'm pretty comfortable with the satellite record because (a) it's truly global (as opposed to surface station data) and (b) it's raw data (they don't adjust it).

That said, HADCRUT tracks decently well to the satellites over this period.

But you're entirely correct - almost 2 decades without warming. The models clearly are not modeling the real world at all well.

LoFan John said...

You forgot to say "unexpectedly".

Borepatch said...

LoFan John, you must be one of those Deniers I keep hearing about ...

Kansas Scout said...

I hope you have a generator. Good luck with the ice storm.

LoFan John said...

I, of course, deny that.