“5 Years To Climate Breakdown”: How to generate computer model scares

Posted: July 11, 2020 by oldbrew in alarmism, climate, Critique, modelling, Natural Variation, Temperature
Tags: ,

Credit: nationalreview.com


Climate models are too unreliable to be any serious guide to the future, as the author points out. But getting decision makers to understand that is near-impossible in many countries, hence the acceptance of alarmist nonsense.
– – –
Shock, horror: According to the WMO and the Met Office, there is a 3% chance of the forthcoming five-year global temperature average exceeding 1.5°C, says Dr. David Whitehouse @ The GWPF.

There are several definitions of hustle. One of them is to use forceful actions to promote an action or point of view.

It’s everywhere of course and in all aspects of climate change. It’s all too apparent when scientists want grants, jobs and headlines.

It’s no new discovery that combining hustle with statistics can get you anywhere.

The recently released news from the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO), prepared by the UK Met Office, that there is a “growing chance” of the world exceeding the “Paris threshold” of 1.5°C in global temperature above pre-industrial levels is a prime example of this.

It says there is a 20% chance that one of the next five years will exceed 1.5°C, and a 70% chance a single month will during the same period.

Another way of saying this, statistically equally justifiable, is that there is an 80% chance that global annual average temperatures will not increase statistically significantly over the next five years. There are no headlines saying that!

Just for a moment think what this means. If there is no significant change in global average temperature by 2025, we will be able to look back thirty years (the official definition of climate) and note that the two major warming episodes, 1998 and 2015, were both due to natural climatic variability, in this case two El Nino events.

In many ways, the WMO report is more a testament to the importance of natural climatic variability than it is to long-term anthropogenic warming.

Continued here.

Comments
  1. tom0mason says:

    Climate breakdown what alarmist codswallop!
    break·down (brāk′doun′)
    n.
    1.
    a. The act or process of failing to function or continue.
    b. The condition resulting from this: a breakdown in communication.

    2. Electricity The abrupt failure of an insulator or insulating medium to restrict the flow of current.

    3. A typically sudden collapse in physical or mental health.

    4. An analysis, an outline, or a summary consisting of itemized data or essentials.

    5. Disintegration or decomposition into parts or elements.

  2. erichux says:

    As always the scares involve comparing differing concepts. If they are talking climate change at the global level, a nonsense since climate is a regional concept as an emergent feature of weather patterns, then individual years are not the metric that should be used but their own (WMO) 30 year mean. Using this approach across the 3 models of global temperature we find

    Whole Record (30 Year Mean)
    HADCRUT4 BEST GISS
    1850-1879 -0.31 -0.25
    1880-1909 0.4
    1980-2019 0.45 1.3 0.59
    Global Temperature Change 0.76 0.9 0.84
    Number of Years 150 150 110
    oC/Year 0.005 0.006 0.008
    Temperature to Limit 0.74 0.6 0.66
    Years to +1.5 oC 146 100 86
    1.5 oC Limit Broken 2165 2119 2105

    However the report suggest preindustrial to be before 1900, with a 5 year baseline. Using this as the basis for analysis;

    1850-1900 Baseline (51 year mean)
    HADCRUT4 BEST GISS
    1850-1900 -0.31 0.4 -0.2 (1880-1900)
    1959-2019 0.27 1.1 0.4
    Global Temperature Change 0.58 0.7 0.6
    Number of Years 120 120 120
    oC/Year 0.005 0.006 0.005
    Temperature to Limit 0.92 0.8 0.9
    Years to +1.5 oC 190 137 180
    1.5 oC Limit Broken 2209 2156 2199

    Hence we have a little more than 5 years to play with.

  3. Gamecock says:

    “Climate models are too unreliable to be climate models.”

    Fixed it.

    They aren’t models.

  4. oldbrew says:

    Only one year at TIME mag 🤣

  5. cognog2 says:

    I call it “The Al Gore Presentation Technique“ ; but can only guess at what is written in the manuel.

  6. JB says:

    I quit looking at Time magazine 4 decades back. Why does anyone pay attention to that slop? Same with Scientific American, all the Astronomy rags, and National Geographic.Come to think of it, virtually every periodical that exhibits an agenda has been eliminated from my perusal.

  7. Jerry says:

    A prediction of global temperature is meaningless if global temperature isn’t changing systematically.

  8. oldbrew says:

    Somebody ought to do a study on all these fake climate deadlines 🥱
    – – –
    The Last Chance Climate Saloon

    November 2000 and December 2009 were both supposed to be our last, best chance to save the planet from climate disaster.
    . . .
    There’s absolutely nothing new going on here, folks. UN drama queens. Silly reporters. Media outlets insulting our intelligence by recycling the same hyperbole over and over again.

    So enjoy a beverage at the saloon this evening. But don’t pay the slightest attention to the doom mongers or the killjoys. I promise you: five years from now the headlines will say exactly the same thing.

    https://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2018/10/10/the-last-chance-climate-saloon/


    – – –
    ‘5 years to climate breakdown’ is in the same category of claim as ‘free beer tomorrow’.

  9. Paul Vaughan says:

    Breaking down the spatial barriers — 4 year flashback:

    (postimg moved ALL images — it’s a piece of work tracking down all the moves, 1 by 1)

  10. ivan says:

    It would help if the idiots generating these models could actually show they have been validated, until then GIGO rules. Since they don’t include everything about the atmosphere they can’t say the models are a true representation of anything. Their results may sound ‘scientific’ to the uninitiated but when real scientists and engineers look at them they fall apart and show the garbage they really are.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s