The first seems to me the mainstream consensus
IPCC modellers position.
The lower and upper points of
the IPCC modellers» range are, respectively, 0.9 ºC above and 0.9 ºC below A&H's 95 % confidence range of 1.7 to 4.9 ºC.
Not exact matches
For their scenario calculations, the AWI
modellers plugged in atmospheric CO2 concentrations in excess of 500 ppm, a level in keeping with the forecasts released by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (
IPCC).
Then, 22 years later, we'll get a better feel as to how much confidence we, as non-statisticians and
modellers, can place in forecasts from Hansen, the
IPCC et al..
So far
modellers have failed to narrow the total bands of uncertainties since the first report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (
IPCC) in 1990.
In comments, several readers suggested that I examine a recent report from the U.K. newspaper the Daily Mail that attempts to tie the research of
modeller and
IPCC author Mojib Latif to the current cold spell in Europe.
This is such a simple and obvious point that I really do not understand why the
IPCC and the
modellers did not see it.
• Contrary to the common practice of climate
modellers and
IPCC, here comparisons are made in terms of actual values and not departures from means («anomalies»).
What's priceless is the bastard nuclearists who are behind this AGW hoax (in France, all climate
modellers and most of French authors at the
IPCC are in laboratories affiliated with our state agency Commissariat à l'Energie Atomique) are aimed at now by greenies, but with that same hoax.
If total solar irradiance does not seem to account for it that is no reason to ignore the phenomenon yet the
modellers and the
IPCC do so.
Why hasn't the
IPCC and the climate
modeller community conducted this analysis themselves?
The
IPCC range of ECS estimates reflects merely the predilections of the
modellers — a classic case of «Weapons of Math Destruction» (6).
The fact that poor Asian countries with most of the world's population have enjoyed faster economic growth rates than the rich countries over the past 30 years is probably the most important socio - economic fact of our time, but it wasn't foreseen by the
modellers and, incredibly, many in the
IPCC milieu still deny that it's happened: three
IPCC chapters (Chapters 1 and 9 of the WG II report and Chapter 1 of WG III report) go out of their way to assert that global inequality has been increasing in recent decades.
The
IPCC range of ECS estimates reflects merely the predilections of the
modellers.
Dr. David Evans, a former climate
modeller for the Australian government's Greenhouse Office, says he found two mathematical errors showing that the
IPCC «over-estimated future global warming by as much as 10 times.»
Although I must confess that Canadian greener and longstanding
IPCC - nik and Greenpeace movie star — and CBC's primary expert of choice —
modeller Andrew Weaver's recent defamation / libel award of $ 50,000 by a labour expert suddently imbued with expertise ex nihilo on what strikes me as being an increasingly crowded libel front does not yield much hope of the optimistic (and / or democratic) kind.
Give me a couple of those billions of US dollars you climate
modellers have, and I will give you the data and present the result at same time as 5AR;-P It does not hurt to be open for other possible truth than the old progress all the time... And take this issue into the
IPCC and ask whether there is institutional and other mechanisms that run contrary to self - correction....