[StopGlobalWhining]

Advocates for the case of human caused global warming frequently cite computer models to support their claims.

So why don’t they prove how accurate their models are by using as initial conditions data from say 1970, run the model, and see how the results match up with conditions today?

They don’t. Not even close. Way off.

Part of the reason is that they are incomplete; they don’t include terrain data because no one knows how to program the effects of the Himalyas or the Rockies etc. They don’t include accurate equations related to water vapor and clouds because there is ongoing debate on their influence on the climate.

None of the models predicted the present decade-long timeout of increasing temperatures despite the continuous increase of CO2 into the atmosphere, now at 38 or 39 molecules of CO2 for every 100,000 other air molecules.

That’s like placing 38 or 39 opposing team fans dressed in their team colors distributed randomly throughout a 100,000 capacity stadium during a football game and measuring their contribution to the fan noise. If the number increased to 50 or 100, would anyone notice? Would you even be able to spot them in the crowd?

And in earths atmosphere today it will be another 4 to 5 1/2 years before the count of CO2 molecules increases by one (to 39 or 40) for every other 100,000 air molecules.

We have accurate weather data going back over 40 years independent of the CRU and NASA adjusted temperatures if we could use declassified data from the Defense Meteorological Satellite Program (DMSP).

Or at least I think we still have that raw data. Do we? Or have they adjusted and contaminated that too?

If not, let’s issue a challenge to the pro-human caused global warming aristocracy to run their models with real data and show the results.

[muawiyah]

We have accurate weather data (temperature, humidity, et al) for surface, midlevel and high altitude regions for about a decade. Prior to that we have inaccurate aggregate surface and midlevel data.

The disaster for the Leftwingtard AGW crowd occurred when satellite data became publicly available.

[Publius6961]

Advocates for the case of human caused global warming frequently always cite computer models to support their claims.

There.
Fixed it for you.

The IPCC themselves have admitted that computers cannot do predictions [because the models are too primitive]; they are now called "projections."

However, the action summaries, and the political recommendations don't deal with such irrelevant "inconvenient" facts.