The study found that, based on recent ice loss rates and the movement of the Thwaites Glacier in West Antarctica, as well
as computer model projections, «early - stage collapse has begun.»
Not exact matches
Computer model projections of future conditions analyzed by the Scripps team indicate that regions such
as the Amazon, Central America, Indonesia, and all Mediterranean climate regions around the world will likely see the greatest increase in the number of «dry days» per year, going without rain for
as many
as 30 days more every year.
As the instructor / researcher, I
modeled all of the technologies, including presentation, graphic organizer, desktop publishing and spreadsheet software, Web tools (webquests, webpages, weblogs), digital still and video cameras, and
computer / video
projection devices.
As a result,
computer models can not make «predictions» they only provide «
projections» which are based on the value of the assumptions made in their preparation.
When these past megadroughts are compared side - by - side with
computer model projections of the 21st century, both the moderate and business -
as - usual emissions scenarios are drier, and the risk of droughts lasting 30 years or longer increases significantly.
Even more significant is the ridiculous reliance placed on
modeling, where unproven input notions about the likely effects of CO2 are circularly spat out by the
computer as multi-decade warming
projections.
Despite this, supporters of the anthropogenic global warming cause regard climate
model computer projections as indisputable predictions, ignoring all else.
As we learn further down this is based on a yet another study by parti - pris alarmists ramping up the climate change scare narrative using dodgy
computer modeled projections of what might happen if all their parameters are correct (which they aren't).
N (3) The
computer climate
models are not reliable or consistently accurate, and
projections of future climate states are little more than speculation
as the uncertainty and error ranges are enormous in a non-linear climate system.
There are serious problems with
projections of likely future temperature, especially
as they have been produced from
computer models.
Prashant Goswami, chief scientist at Bangalore's CSIR Centre for Mathematical
Modeling and
Computer Simulation and one of the lead authors of the IPCC report, admitted that these conclusions were based on climatic
projections that were not
as firm
as those made at a global level.
Such solecisms throughout the IPCC's assessment reports (including the insertion, after the scientists had completed their final draft, of a table in which four decimal points had been right - shifted so
as to multiply tenfold the observed contribution of ice - sheets and glaciers to sea - level rise), combined with a heavy reliance upon
computer models unskilled even in short - term
projection, with initial values of key variables unmeasurable and unknown, with advancement of multiple, untestable, non-Popper-falsifiable theories, with a quantitative assignment of unduly high statistical confidence levels to non-quantitative statements that are ineluctably subject to very large uncertainties, and, above all, with the now - prolonged failure of TS to rise
as predicted (Figures 1, 2), raise questions about the reliability and hence policy - relevance of the IPCC's central
projections.