A leading climatologist has said that the computer simulations that are used to predict global warming are failing on a key measure of the climate today and cannot be trusted.
Speaking to a meeting in the Palace of Westminster in London, Professor John Christy of the University of Alabama in Huntsville told MPs and peers that almost all climate models have predicted rapid warming at high altitudes in the tropics:
“They all have rapid warming above 30,000 feet in the tropics – it’s effectively a diagnostic signal of greenhouse warming. But in reality, it’s just not happening. It’s warming up there but at only about one-third of the rate predicted by the models.”
A similar discrepancy between empirical measurements and computer predictions has been confirmed at the global level:
“The global warming trend for the last 40 years, starting in 1979 when satellite measurements began, is +0.13C per decade or about half of what climate models predicted.”
And Dr. Christy says that lessons are not being learned:
“An early look at some of the latest generation of climate models reveals they are predicting even faster warming. This is simply not credible.”
A paper outlining Dr. Christy’s key findings is published today by the Global Warming Policy Foundation.
The Tropical Skies: Falsifying climate alarm (pdf)
Contact:
Prof John Christy
christy@nsstc.uah.edu
What other branch of science can consistently be wrong in one direction and still pump out the same lame alarmist crap ? Climate science has been hijacked by rent seekers and a small group of grant dependent scientists but as evident in recent elections the tide has turned . About time .
“Climate Models Are Predicting Too Much Warming” — that is because they can’t predict anything. They are too heavily weighed using human-produced CO2 as a variable of the climate, whereas they leave out too many other important but undocumentable variables such as CO2 belched out by volcanos, geophysical heating of oceans (and Antarctica), etc
I would like to see a graph linking payments to climate modelers and the degree to which they pump the tires on the earths fever . Could it be the origins of the hockey stick that got mixed up when a dog tried to eat the “research ” ?
Why is it that the Russians are closest to actual . Must be they were trying to get the big D elected . Those crafty Russkies .
So if the climate models are basically crap why is $ 7 trillion being wasted ?
OK I’ve answered my own question .
A very fundamental concept of science is to compare a theory with data, and if it doesn’t match, modify or scrap the theory. However, in climate change the theory is supporting a number of political objectives so it is set in stone and can not be changed. What is ironic is I have read some articles written by those on the environmental left that acknowledge the models are over stating the predicted warming. However, it makes no difference.
It’s not about the environment, or the climate, it’s really about taming capitalism and harnessing it for socialist purposes.
Their ends justify their means. Climate change propaganda is just one weapon against capitalism. Another tactic is to convince youngsters that their future is bleak, then tempt them with free everything, cradle to grave security. If the socialists can tame American individualism and capitalism, they’ll bleed it dry.