The Sydney Morning Herald never actually tells you the temperature rises Hansen predicted in 1988 because you’d then see how wrong he was.
After leading NASA climate scientist James Hansen told the US Congress 30 years ago this week global warming was already worsening heatwaves, many of his colleagues figured politicians would heed the warning…
But it was Hansen’s testimony – made on a sweltering summer’s day during then the hottest year on record – that put climate change on the front page of newspapers.
Hannam avoids saying what Hansen predicted the global temperature would be by now, but reports claim that he was spot on:
“30 years later, it’s clear [the model] simulations were skillful,” Gavin Schmidt, who succeeded Hansen as head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies in 2014, tells Fairfax Media. “The predictions were quite good.”
Now, why would Hannam have omitted the most relevant part of Hansen’s predictions 30 years ago?
For the full story – one which should embarrass Hannam and make readers distrust the Sydney Morning Herald – let’s go to scientists Pat Michaels and Ryan Maue:
James E. Hansen … on June 23, 1988 … expressed to the senators his “high degree of confidence” in “a cause-and-effect relationship between the greenhouse effect and observed warming.” …
Mr. Hansen’s testimony described three possible scenarios for the future of carbon dioxide emissions.
He called Scenario A “business as usual,” as it maintained the accelerating emissions growth typical of the 1970s and ’80s. This scenario predicted the earth would warm 1 degree Celsius by 2018.
Scenario B set emissions lower, rising at the same rate today as in 1988. Mr. Hansen called this outcome the “most plausible,” and predicted it would lead to about 0.7 degree of warming by this year.
He added a final projection, Scenario C, which he deemed highly unlikely: constant emissions beginning in 2000. In that forecast, temperatures would rise a few tenths of a degree before flatlining after 2000.
Thirty years of data have been collected since Mr. Hansen outlined his scenarios—enough to determine which was closest to reality. And the winner is Scenario C.
Global surface temperature has not increased significantly since 2000, discounting the larger-than-usual El Niño of 2015-16.
Assessed by Mr. Hansen’s model, surface temperatures are behaving as if we had capped 18 years ago the carbon-dioxide emissions responsible for the enhanced greenhouse effect. But we didn’t.
And it isn’t just Mr. Hansen who got it wrong. Models devised by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have, on average, predicted about twice as much warming as has been observed since global satellite temperature monitoring began 40 years ago.
Why didn’t Peter Hannam and the Sydney Morning Herald mention that inconvenient truth? Are they more interested in protecting their global warming scare than giving their readers the facts?
Read more at Herald Sun
Hansen is no different then that phonie Bill Nye their more cracked then a broken clay planter