Study Confirms Climate Models are Getting Future Warming Projections Right

http://www.surfacestations.org/

Check out this website to see what a farce the surface data really is.

 

And that is just the US. The ROW is much worse.

 

Because that is the way the data is entered. The flawed real world data is manipulated to estimate what the measurements would be.

https://www.academia.edu/35571845/D...h_the_most_extensive_peer_reviewed_references

 

I am not assuming anything, the fires can change things, so can volcanos, North Korea could nuke Yellowstone and nuclear winter is always a possibility.

It would be “pointedly foolish” for a model to feed itself by taking surface temperature measurements to extrapolate the future, the predictions are independent of the temperature data used to evaluate them.

Claiming the models are falsely true, that the evaluation of the temperatures in the past was wrong so the models must now also be wrong, does not fit the definition of oxymoron for the title or anything else. The data used to evaluate a model does not create an oxymoron, nor does your rejection of any data create an oxymoron.

You are creating an oxymoron in your mind, based upon your perception of data.

A weather station placed such as to be in shadow during winter and near a heat sink (passive solar wall) in summer, or one of the two, still does not change the fact it can show an increase in its norms. The numbers of such stations is not the massive disaster that many have claimed; there is no vast conspiracy to fudge the data.

It does not matter that my thermometers, windows open, in the south-facing sunroom is above 60 degrees and one in my north-facing bedroom is below 60, and that both are above the 46 degrees at the airport; two thermometers badly placed can show a rise above the norms.

I can Get Future Warming Predictions Right, that is riding conditions, from the badly placed thermometers and put the liners in my motorcycle jacket and pants, wear a hoody too, and know to use my winter gloves; all based upon a bad 60 degree prediction I can dress like it is 40, and do that accurately over and over again.

 

It’s quite simple. If a model matches erroneous “data” the model is erroneous. And those models cannot be trusted to predict the future.

 

Simple?

Your link says something about viewing climate as a simple system, which troubled him:

https://www.academia.edu/35571845/D...h_the_most_extensive_peer_reviewed_references

How does a model (rhetorically speaking) know the data used to evaluate it in the future will be erroneous? That requires a massive plot. One would not be able to rely upon measurements agreeing, they would have to go to each and every single weather station and change the data recorded, they would have to hack the entire system of measurement.

 

Because the current data is erroneous.

 

Am I reading this correctly?

 

You are claiming their temperature data at the time of the model was erroneous, and that they could predict it would continue to be erroneous in their favor. That would be a long running plot of significant magnitude.

Maybe I should repeat myself, because obviously I must be a part of this fast conspiracy to read thermometers wrong:

"A weather station placed such as to be in shadow during winter and near a heat sink (passive solar wall) in summer, or one of the two, still does not change the fact it can show an increase in its norms.

It does not matter that my thermometers, windows open, in the south-facing sunroom is above 60 degrees and one in my north-facing bedroom is below 60, and that both are above the 46 degrees at the airport; two thermometers badly placed can show a rise above the norms.

I can Get Future Warming Predictions Right, that is riding conditions, from the badly placed thermometers and put the liners in my motorcycle jacket and pants, wear a hoody too, and know to use my winter gloves; all based upon a bad 60 degree prediction I can dress like it is 40, and do that accurately over and over again."

 

I've seen that site before, a long time ago, it's an old standby: "NEWS Updated 07/30/2012"

 

I will also add that one of the pictures at that site somewhat resembles the placement of the weather station at the Peachtree City Airport in 1982, I know because I went there looking for a job. And I know because that was still the claim then. I don't think they realize, because some lack common sense, they would have to put the stations on "rails" and keep moving them around to make the data fit a wanted profile.

 

Of course the globe is warming. That qualitative trend is undeniable. But the quantitative magnitude of this warming cannot be accurately determined and the future magnitude of warming can also not be accurately predicted.

Your riding apparel is dependent on your belief on the local weather forecast.

 

What “wanted profile” is that ???

 

"a graphical or other representation of information relating to particular characteristics of something, recorded in quantified form." Being that they want the planet to be warming so they would have to move the stations around to fit the desired graph, or bribe lots of people, and kill those that don't take the bribes...

"Because the current data is erroneous." (AFM)
"Of course the globe is warming." (AFM)
"Non sequitur. Your facts are uncoordinated."

 

My conclusions are based on observations. The globe is warming but the magnitude of this warming trend cannot be accurately quantified due to the poor quality of the available surface temperature data. Consequently the warming trend cannot be predicted accurately as well

 

41 times the "experts" got it wrong.

1. 1967: Dire Famine Forecast By 1975
2. 1969: Everyone Will Disappear In a Cloud Of Blue Steam By 1989 (1969)
3. 1970: Ice Age By 2000
4. 1970: America Subject to Water Rationing By 1974 and Food Rationing By 1980
5. 1971: New Ice Age Coming By 2020 or 2030
6. 1972: New Ice Age By 2070
7. 1974: Space Satellites Show New Ice Age Coming Fast
8. 1974: Another Ice Age?
9. 1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life
10. 1976: Scientific Consensus Planet Cooling, Famines imminent
11. 1980: Acid Rain Kills Life In Lakes
12. 1978: No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend
13. 1988: Regional Droughts (that never happened) in 1990s
14. 1988: Temperatures in DC Will Hit Record Highs
15. 1988: Maldive Islands will Be Underwater by 2018 (they’re not)
16. 1989: Rising Sea Levels will Obliterate Nations if Nothing Done by 2000
17. 1989: New York City’s West Side Highway Underwater by 2019 (it’s not)
18. 2000: Children Won’t Know what Snow Is
19. 2002: Famine In 10 Years If We Don’t Give Up Eating Fish, Meat, and Dairy
20. 2004: Britain will Be Siberia by 2024
21. 2008: Arctic will Be Ice Free by 2018
22. 2008: Climate Genius Al Gore Predicts Ice-Free Arctic by 2013
23. 2009: Climate Genius Prince Charles Says we Have 96 Months to Save World
24. 2009: UK Prime Minister Says 50 Days to ‘Save The Planet From Catastrophe’
25. 2009: Climate Genius Al Gore Moves 2013 Prediction of Ice-Free Arctic to 2014
26. 2013: Arctic Ice-Free by 2015 ( I have to wonder if the goal posts get heavy moving them so often.)
27. 2014: Only 500 Days Before ‘Climate Chaos’
28. 1968: Overpopulation Will Spread Worldwide
29. 1970: World Will Use Up All its Natural Resources
30. 1966: Oil Gone in Ten Years
31. 1972: Oil Depleted in 20 Years
32. 1977: Department of Energy Says Oil will Peak in 90s
33. 1980: Peak Oil In 2000
34. 1996: Peak Oil in 2020
35. 2002: Peak Oil in 2010
36. 2006: Super Hurricanes!
37. 2005 : Manhattan Underwater by 2015
38. 1970: Urban Citizens Will Require Gas Masks by 1985
39. 1970: Nitrogen buildup Will Make All Land Unusable
40. 1970: Decaying Pollution Will Kill all the Fish
41. 1970s: Killer Bees!

This is why I don’t take any of the hysteria seriously. The entire Climate change movement is being used by the left to extend the size of government and take over parts of our everyday lives that have never been taken over before. They want to control what you drive, what you eat, how many children you have, and what you use for energy.

When the left yells at you and tells you that you are doubting “experts” simply remind them the track record of these fools.

https://thepalmierireport.com/41-times-climate-experts-were-wrong/

 

Not climate related but not to mention the predictions of mass gun violence in Richmond yesterday by the thousands of law abiding gun carrying US citizens.

 

You respond from a recently released study published NASA on the accuracy of the models with an article from thepalmierrireport.com with a list of news articles that explicitly chose to discuss the most extreme outliers (and some of the minority opinions as was the case with the "global cooling" predictions) of the climate models over the course of 50+ years?

Seriously?

The fact that your list is only 41 after 50+ ****ing years is almost proof positive that climatologists are largely correct in their predictions.

 

Al Gore is an outlier ???

What is your list of things that global warming alarmists got right ???

BTW very few people do not believe that the earth is in a warming period.

 

Al Gore is not a climatologist and yes, the threats he cited were almost exclusively based on the most severe outliers.

The Earth is Warming and the rate at which it is warming is getting faster almost exclusively because of man made causes. That is my list of things that global warming alarmists got right.

 

The level of perfection you seem to be requiring reminds me an awful lot of this AT I once knew, great at math. So guy goes out to troubleshoot the TACAN, and hours later someone asks where he is, so I go out to find him, he is struggling with the little like book shelf/coat closet panel you see when you first enter the C-130. I hit it and snap it in place. He could not find the problem, with the TACAN. I pull the box out, there is a tiny nut in the back of the rack, I remove it, put the box back in, it works, problem solved. He was out there for hours; it took me like ten minutes, minus the ten minutes I watched him struggle, and pretty much had to drag him away to pop that panel in place.

The accuracy can’t be 100% because other things happen too, some of them due to arson, some due to conditions that make arson worse, what goes into the atmosphere from natural causes to “man-caused disasters” (see Obama’s moron on terrorism) can change things. Still the issue is not any apparent “poor quality of the available surface temperature data,” which seriously cannot be that bad, the issue is what causes the warming or cooling.

Models getting predictions correct enough is significant due to the fact of volcanic eruptions and things we cannot predict.

 

Must be why the models consistently show more warming than observed science.

 

There must be sacrifice and all people must suffer: No heat in winter, we must look like old hags in Siberia wrapped up in sixteen layers of clothes, rags, and shawls. No combustion.

No more AC in summer and everybody wearing just minimal swim wear, coat and tie outlawed.

No more nothin'.

 

The earth is warming. The rate of warming is indeterminate and cannot be quantified. And of course there is no proof that human CO2 emissions has anything to do with the global warming. That’s all that can be said.

Regardless of what you believe there is nothing politically possible to significantly reduce human CO2 emissions.

 

Is that what you see from the study from the OP?