IPCC confirms climate models wrong. Now NASA confirms sea levels dropping

From the IPCC report:

Chapter 9, page 743: "The simulation of clouds in climate models remains challenging. There is very high confidence that uncertainties in cloud processes explain much of the spread in modelled climate sensitivity. However, the simulation of clouds in climate models has shown modest improvement relative to models available at the time of the AR4, and this has been aided by new evaluation techniques and new observations for clouds. Nevertheless, biases in cloud simulation lead to regional errors on cloud radiative effect of several tens of watts per square meter"

"Most simulations of the historical period do not reproduce the observed reduction in global mean surface warming trend over the last 10 to 15 years. There is medium confidence that the trend difference between models and observations during 1998–2012 is to a substantial degree caused by internal variability, with possible contributions from forcing error and some models overestimating the response to increasing greenhouse gas (GHG) forcing.Most, though not all, models overestimate the observed warming trend in the tropical troposphere over the last 30 years, and tend to underestimate the long-term lower stratospheric cooling trend. "

From NASA:







When are all the AGW religionists going to start explaining all this?

 

Link to source citation?

 

climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/

 

Based upon the chart the sea level has risen and fallen many times in the last 20 years but there is a clear overall increase. I do note that since early 2016 the sea levels have leveled off yet nowhere in your source dose NASA make the claim that seal levels are dropping.

 

so sea levels ARE rising.

 

But none of the falls have lasted as long as the current period. *Current* trends become future trends. If you don't pay attention to current trends then you miss what is happening because you have your back turned to it looking backward!

Of course NASA isn't going to claim the sea levels are dropping. NASA is the organization that started out saying that the global warming hiatus would have to last five years to be a real trend. Then when five years came they increased it to ten years. When ten years were reached they said it would have to last twenty years. And now that we are reaching 20 years for the hiatus they are saying it will have to last for 50 years to actually be a trend.

 

They haven't for two years. The longest hiatus since 1995. Go look at the graph!

 

Yeah, for about 20,000 years or so.

 

Yeah but we just emerged from an ice age.

 

Caused by AGW?

 

Which is totally expected, given the fact that warming occurs in interglacial periods. This is called climate change as the climate is in a constant state of change. It gives us ice ages(although our brilliant climatologists still do not know what causes repeating ices ages) and it gives us periods of warming.

Of course I know some of us are concerned about the co2 we have added will give us some kinda of doomsday in the future, but this is nothing but conjecture and fear mongering.

For some of us, we see global warming as more positive than negative, given past warmings has benefitted humanity. Why should this one be different? Given the steady growth in population, we should be worried about being able to produce enough food for a growing population. In the past, these warmings have provided more food as growing areas could move north, opening up more fertile land for greater food production. Warming isn't the problem like a new ice age would be. And as long as we keep warming, instead of cooling, we have a better chance of not reducing populations by starvation.

 

current trends become future trends. Now that is some kinda profound crap there, man.

 

What that climate models have a degree of inaccuracy - always known that which is why they have CONFIDENCE intervals

As for your graph - from here it looks like it is continuing on an upward trend. OF course there will be some variations in the trend but the overall trend is still upward

 

I don't know why we even left the ice age. The climate on Earth is different somehow from 100,000-12,000 years ago.

But the last ice and snow from the North Pole, Greenland, and the South Pole has only been in danger in the last several years.

And it's not just AGW anymore, it's gone on automatic as the greenhouse gasses trapped in frozen tundra and the deep sea seep out.

 

My point was we've been through a number of ice ages and temperate jungle phases before man was ever on the earth.

 

I'm not sure what causes it. But I read somewhere that we're supposed to be in the temporary warming period between two ice ages. They called it an "interglacial period." We aren't supposed to be headed for a jungle Earth.

 

Yeah but the planet has gone from temperate jungle to ice age and back again before man could have had any impact whatsoever.

To think we can fix, let alone understand these cycles, is hubris.

 

But, they are supposed to be accelerating according to the alarmists like the Goracle.

 

We are in a 2.6 million year long ice age. We are lucky to be in one of the mild inter-glacial periods.

 

Since you are willing to use the IPCC conclusions, then you clearly accept the consensus and 90-95% confidence that global warming is real and significantly due to human activities.

It's always good to see people turning to science for the answers.

 

Good science works based upon the best available evidence and make adjustments to the data based upon an objective review of new information.

 

Or in the case of AGW, adjustments are made to the data to fit the narrative. Eventually reality catches up.

 

Not sure what the AGW is, nor am I arguing that there are no biased scientists, but just because not all scientists are objective does not compel me to dismiss all the data on the subject.

 

What data? The observed science or what the alarmism is based on, computer models?

 

This data. https://www.google.com/search?q=Global+warming&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

As I am not an expert on the subject I must rely upon others for my knowledge on the topic of global warming. I am not here to make claims to the positive or the negative, I am here to learn from people like you.