See for summation of some of the mathematical ideas involved. IMO if this is not properly accounted for (and more research is needed) the models can never give a realistic projection of future climate. Of course the main element that has been reduced in the models is the solar effect. truly random events, must be assessed separately (can they currently separate them from the chaotic factors?), and again measured to very high degree of precision and accuracy, to be able to account for how random events will affect the chaotic variables. Just one of the reasons climate models are utterly useless in the short term and poppycock for the long term, and why weather forecasts are not accurate much beyond 5 days. Indeed Kevin Trenberth despaired of the computer models not being initialized with real or even realistic data. That and a thorough understanding of all the chaotic elements involved. ALL the weather and climate factors MEASURED to a very very high degree of precision and accuracy) they can not possibly assess the probable trajectory of future weather or climate. Without knowing the climate starting point accurately enough (i.e. It’s not just the errors it is a total misconception about the nature of chaos as being separate from noise. Nature controls the climate (and atmospheric CO2 levels), not humans. IMO all that Maher et al.’s paper show is that climate models are as useful as chocolate rocking-horse excrement. This result highlights the importance of using multiple SMILEs, with a range of estimates of internal variability in future studies investigating mid-term time-scales and underscores the importance of evaluating not just a model’s mean state or forced trend, but also its internal variability.
#Rare thumpies breeding driver#
Model uncertainty is found to be the main driver of mid-term trends when we take a low estimate of internal variability, while with a high estimate, internal variability instead dominates. What they truly mean is natural chaotic variability! And it is something that is not accurately quantified or modeled, so instead climate catastrophists try to squeeze it into some sort of ‘known-unknowns’ box.ĬO2 warming ain’t making it (in 20+years of temperature records there’s still a ‘hiatus’), so the modeling maniacs resort to mere sophistry to try and say they do understand ‘climate change’ but don’t know about the operation of all it’s specifics. Maher et al., (2020) Quantifying the role of internal variability in the temperature we expect to observe in the coming decades, Environmental Research Letters, Volume 15, Number 5Īhahah, “internal variability” says Maher et al.’s paper. If only climate scientists had evidence - they wouldn’t need to cling to random noise of storms, fires and floods. Indeed, and perhaps counter intuitively, in all models a lack of warming, or even a cooling trend could be observed at all individual points on the globe, even under the largest greenhouse gas emissions. Internal variability is the approved term, but if you say natural variability instead, we’ll have to arrest you. Additionally we demonstrate that this result is independent of the model-dependent estimate of the magnitude of internal variability. We confirm that in the short-term, surface temperature trend projections are dominated by internal variability, with little influence of structural model differences or warming pathway. (2020) acknowledge that internal variability in global surface temperature variations is “a difficult concept to communicate” because we have very few observations of its impact and so we must rely on assumptions about how the climate system might work. July 2020, NoTricksZoneĪ new study documents the dominance of internal variability in decadal-scale global temperature changes and suggests we may experience a global cooling trend during the next 15 or even 30 years despite rising greenhouse gases. They say the models are better than ever, and any discrepancy is just natural variability.Ĭlimate modelers are prepared now for 30 more years of failure: ‘Most Of The Globe’ Could Experience ‘No Warming’ For 30 Years Due To Temperature-Driving Internal Variabilityīy Kenneth Richard on 13.
What does a climate scientist say when they can’t predict the climate on a local, regional, or continental scale, in the near future or the historic past, and they can’t do rain, clouds, humidity or drought either? Natural Variability is the get-out-of-jail card for climate modelers that lasts 30 years
Odour reduction practices at Narrogin Beef Producers.Western Australian State Government email list.Australian Elected Representatives – Emails and phones.Thermometer selection (mystery loss of data).The 800 year lag in CO2 after temperature – graphed.ClimateGate: Thirty Years in the Making (Edition 1.1).The evidence that AGW fans need to provide.
0 kommentar(er)
