Skip to comments.Policy Implications of Climate Models on the Verge of Failure
Posted on 06/28/2013 2:37:00 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
At the request of the authors, this was converted from a poster displayed at the AGU Science Policy Conference, Washington, June 24-26. Anthony
By Paul C. Knappenberger and Patrick J. Michaels
Center for the Study of Science, Cato Institute, Washington DC
Assessing the consistency between real-world observations and climate model projections
is a challenging problem but one that is essential prior to making policy decisions which
depend largely on such projections. National and international assessments often mischaracterize the level of consistency between observations and projections.
Unfortunately, policymakers are often unaware of this situation, which leaves them
vulnerable to developing policies that are ineffective at best and dangerous at worst.
Here, we find that at the global scale, climate models are on the verge of failing to
adequately capture observed changes in the average temperature over the past 10 to 30
yearsthe period of the greatest human influence on the atmosphere. At the regional
scale, specifically across the United States, climate models largely fail to replicate known
precipitation changes both in sign as well as magnitude.
On the first count, the near inability of climate model projections to contain the observed
global temperature trends, it is likely that the climate model overestimation of the earths
equilibrium climate sensitivityan overestimation which averages about 40 percentis
playing a large role in the models gross exaggeration of the current rate of temperature
rise (which, for example, has been virtually zero during the past 16 years).
On the second count, the general inability of general circulation models to even get the sign of the observed precipitation changes across the U.S. correct, much less the magnitude, likely stems from the complexities of the climate system on spatial and temporal scales that lie far beneath those of current generation GCMs.
Global Average Surface Temperatures, 2001-2012:
Global Average Surface Temperature Projections, 2001-2020:
U. S. PRECIPITATION
Observed U.S. Precipitation Change:
Projected U.S. Precipitation Change
Number of Years Before Predicted Changes Are Greater Than Natural Variability:
Observations, 1951 2005:
Models, 1951 2005:
It is impossible to present reliable future projections from a collection of climate
models which generally cannot simulate observed change. As a consequence, we
recommend that unless/until the collection of climate models can be demonstrated to accurately capture observed characteristics of known climate changes, policymakers should avoid basing any decisions upon projections made from them. Further, those policies which have already be established using projections from these climate models should be revisited.
Assessments which suffer from the inclusion of unreliable climate model projections include those produced by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the U.S. Global Climate Change Research Program (including the draft of their most recent National Climate Assessment). Policies which are based upon such assessments include those established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency pertaining to the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act.
Aldrin, M., et al., 2012. Bayesian estimation of climate sensitivity based on a
simple climate model fitted to observations of hemispheric temperature and global
ocean heat content. Environmetrics, doi: 10.1002/env.2140.
Annan, J.D., and J.C Hargreaves, 2011. On the generation and interpretation of
probabilistic estimates of climate sensitivity. Climatic Change, 104, 324-436.
Hargreaves, J.C., et al., 2012. Can the Last Glacial Maximum constrain climate
sensitivity? Geophysical Research Letters, 39, L24702, doi:
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007. Climate Change 2007: The
Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Solomon, S., et al.
(eds). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 996pp.
Lewis, N. 2013. An objective Bayesian, improved approach for applying optimal
fingerprint techniques to estimate climate sensitivity. Journal of Climate, doi:
Lindzen, R.S., and Y-S. Choi, 2011. On the observational determination of climate
sensitivity and its implications. Asia-Pacific Journal of Atmospheric Science, 47,
Ring, M.J., et al., 2012. Causes of the global warming observed since the 19th
century. Atmospheric and Climate Sciences, 2, 401-415, doi:
Schmittner, A., et al. 2011. Climate sensitivity estimated from temperature
reconstructions of the Last Glacial Maximum. Science, 334, 1385-1388, doi:
As a consequence, we recommend that unless/until the collection of climate models can be demonstrated to accurately capture observed characteristics of known climate changes, policymakers should avoid basing any decisions upon projections made from them.
Further, those policies which have already be established using projections from these climate models should be revisited.
The only POLICY DECISIONS that need to be made concerning the AGW FRAUD is to VOTE THEIR SORRY COMMIE REAR ENDS OUT OF OFFICE and PROSECUTE THOSE THAT COMMITTED A FRAUD.
OK!! Everybody pay attention!
Lesson for today:
1. The sun is 1,300,000 times as big as the earth.
2. The sun is a ball of fire that controls our climates.
3. The earth is a rock.
4. The earth is a speck in comparison to the size of the sun.
5. Inhabitants of the earth are less than specks.
Study Question: How do less-than-specks in congress plan to control the sun?