New Paper — IPCC’s Climate Change Models Are Worthless

By now, anyone who pays attention to climate change issues knows that the discussion of what to do about it is premised on various climate models showing that the climate will get a lot warmer over the next hundred years or so due to human emissions of greenhouse gasses.  A new peer reviewed study, “A comparison of local and aggregated climate model outputs with observed data,” Hydrological Sciences Journal, 55:7, 1094 – 1110, takes a look at several models that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (“IPCC”) relied upon.

To test the models, researchers used the models to “hindcast.”  According to Wikipedia:

 A hindcast is a way of testing a mathematical model. Known or closely estimated inputs for past events are entered into the model to see how well the output matches the known results. Hindcasting is also known as backtesting.

An example of hindcasting would be entering climate forcings (events that force change) into a climate model. If the hindcast accurately showed weather events that are known to have occurred, the model would be considered successful.

 That is what researchers did with the IPCC climate models:

According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), global circulation models (GCM) are able to “reproduce features of the past climates and climate changes” (Randall et al., 2007, p. 601). Here we test whether this is indeed the case. We examine how well several model outputs fit measured temperature and rainfall in many stations around the globe. We also integrate measurements and model outputs over a large part of a continent, the contiguous USA (the USA excluding islands and Alaska), and examine the extent to which models can reproduce the past climate there.

As it turns out, the climate models outputs that Al Gore & Co. are relying on to tell us we need to destroy the world economy, and that Pres. Obama & Co. are using to impose massive regulation and subsidies to battle carbon emissions, don’t even get close to accurately measuring temperature and rainfall when applied against observed data:

It is claimed that GCMs provide credible quantitative estimates of future climate change, particularly at continental scales and above. Examining the local performance of the models at 55 points, we found that local projections do not correlate well with observed measurements. Furthermore, we found that the correlation at a large spatial scale, i.e. the contiguous USA, is worse than at the local scale.

 Since the model predictions do not correlate well with observed data, the models are worthless.  They failed.  They cannot predict future climate, and therefore should not form the basis for any action.  None.

Meanwhile, politicians and the media will continue to pretend as if all this climate change politicking is based on actual science.

Published in: on December 6, 2010 at 12:16 pm  Comments (1)  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

RSS feed for comments on this post.

One CommentLeave a comment

  1. […] the UN’s political climate change advocacy group, the IPCC.  As I wrote some time ago, the climate change models cannot even hindcast, so they certainly can’t be relied on for forecasts used to reorganize our entire global […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: