A paper led by James Risbey (2014) in Nature Climate Change takes a clever approach to evaluating how accurate climate
model temperature predictions have been while getting around the noise caused by natural cycles.
Not exact matches
In Chicago, the Park District will use a new high - tech system that uses computer software to give real - time
predictions of bacteria counts based on such factors as water
temperature,
modeling of the lake bottom and wave action monitored by buoys.
The researchers then used a mathematical
model that combined the conflict data with
temperature and rainfall projections through 2050 to come up with
predictions about the likelihood of climate - related violence in the future.
Obtaining accurate sea surface
temperatures is important for a range of applications — from weather
prediction to climate
modeling to understanding marine ecosystem fluctuations.
Long - term data from a wind farm at San Gorgonio, California, confirmed his earlier
model predictions: surface
temperatures behind the wind turbines were higher than in front during the night, but as much as 4 °C lower by day.
In his new paper, Lovejoy applies the same approach to the 15 - year period after 1998, during which globally averaged
temperatures remained high by historical standards, but were somewhat below most
predictions generated by the complex computer
models used by scientists to estimate the effects of greenhouse - gas emissions.
It is also argued that experiment clearly indicates that interlayer interactions strongly affect the superconducting transition
temperature, Tc, consistent with the fact that no theoretical calculations on two - dimensional Hubbard
models have resulted in the
prediction of high transition
temperatures, and that anyon
models are not favored by experiment.
The UI study showed that adding thermometer data, which captures clinically relevant symptoms (
temperature) likely even before a person goes to the doctor, to simple forecasting
models, improved
predictions of flu activity.
The new findings of successful multi-year drought / fire
predictions are based on a series of computer
modeling experiments, using the state - of - the - art earth system
model, the most detailed data on current ocean
temperature and salinity conditions, and the climate responses to natural and human - linked radiative forcing.
If this interpretation of the observations is correct, it could confirm a 30 - year - old
prediction of the cosmic inflation theory: that the simplest
models of inflation can generate an observable level of gravitational waves, comparable to density or
temperature fluctuations in the early universe.
The
predictions of winds and
temperatures in these
models are uncertain, and probably underestimate the extent of cold winters.
13 - Feb - 2007 Antarctic
Temperatures Disagree with Climate
Model Predictions Ohio State University http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/527313/
Bromwich said the disagreement between climate
model predictions and the snowfall and
temperature records doesn't necessarily mean that the
models are wrong.
The kinder, gentler
model from the Hadley Centre for Climate
Prediction and Research in the United Kingdom estimated a wetter, warmer future: Rainfall may increase 20 percent to 25 percent, mean annual
temperatures could increase 2 degrees Fahrenheit by 2030 and 4 degrees by 2100.
The differences between the «natural forcing»
model predictions and measured global
temperatures were used to determine AGHG forcing functions for their final climate
prediction model.
Due to the complexity of physical processes, climate
models have uncertainties in global
temperature prediction.
In the same paper in which he made his often - quoted «
prediction» that doubling the atmospheric concentration of CO 2 would lead to an increase of 10 °C in surface mean
temperature, F. Möller makes an almost never quoted disclaimer to the effect that a 1 percent increase in general cloudiness in the same
model would completely mask this effect.
To say that this would not alter the way we look at either
temperature changes or
model predictions would be incorrect.
p.s. To compare to Vahrenholt's forecast, here's a comparison of earlier
model projections of global
temperature for the IPCC (
prediction with the CMIP3
model ensemble used in the 4th IPCC assessment report, published in 2007) with the actual changes in
temperature (the four colored curves).
The magnitude it actually had actually risen, how different these
temperatures were from the 1940s, the conflict between
model prediction / theory and observation, etc, were the issues the satellite data raised.
Models actually predict that the interior of the ice sheets should gain mass because of the increased snowfall that goes along with warmer
temperatures, and recent observations actually agree with those
predictions.
When I look at the comparisons of
temperature change vs.
model prediction that you showed us, I see something different from what I think that you see.
For example, Kenyan malarial epidemiologist Andrew Githeko was targeted a decade ago after his
model - based
predictions of the spread of malaria into the highlands of East Africa, where it is currently expanding but was historically absent due to the
temperature limitations that altitude brings.
Also what about publishing how
modelled predictions from 5 or 10 years ago compare with measured
temperatures?
While the definition of a forcing may appear a little arbitrary, the reason why radiative forcing is used is because it (conveniently) gives quite good
predictions of what happens in
models to the global mean
temperature once the climate system has fully responded to the change.
Global
temperature has in recent years increased more slowly than before, but this is within the normal natural variability that always exists, and also within the range of
predictions by climate
models — even despite some cool forcing factors such as the deep solar minimum not included in the
models.
«A Comparison of Tropical
Temperature Trends With
Model Predictions» http://uahnews.uah.edu/newsread.php?newsID=994
that climate
models can not account for the observations we already have let alone make adequate
predictions about what will happen in the future.that century - scale variations in tropical Pacific climate modes can significantly modulate radiatively forced shifts in global
temperature.»
Canadian Ice Service, 4.7, Multiple Methods As with CIS contributions in June 2009, 2010, and 2011, the 2012 forecast was derived using a combination of three methods: 1) a qualitative heuristic method based on observed end - of - winter arctic ice thicknesses and extents, as well as an examination of Surface Air
Temperature (SAT), Sea Level Pressure (SLP) and vector wind anomaly patterns and trends; 2) an experimental Optimal Filtering Based (OFB)
Model, which uses an optimal linear data filter to extrapolate NSIDC's September Arctic Ice Extent time series into the future; and 3) an experimental Multiple Linear Regression (MLR)
prediction system that tests ocean, atmosphere and sea ice predictors.
The final part of Zycher's argument pertains to the divergence between climate
models»
predictions of climate change and
temperature observations.
So using the lower sensitivity of the current
model of 2.7 C as I understand it (at least for «fast feedbacks») his
predictions match observed
temperatures more closely.
I suspect that it looked OK in your view or you didn't check; «the paper i cited talks of the hiatus in global
temperatures for the past 20 years or so, that the Little Ice Age was global in extent, and that climate
models can not account for the observations we already have let alone make adequate
predictions about what will happen in the future.
Canadian Ice Service, 4.7 (+ / - 0.2), Heuristic / Statistical (same as June) The 2015 forecast was derived by considering a combination of methods: 1) a qualitative heuristic method based on observed end - of - winter Arctic ice thickness extents, as well as winter Surface Air
Temperature, Sea Level Pressure and vector wind anomaly patterns and trends; 2) a simple statistical method, Optimal Filtering Based
Model (OFBM), that uses an optimal linear data filter to extrapolate the September sea ice extent timeseries into the future and 3) a Multiple Linear Regression (MLR)
prediction system that tests ocean, atmosphere and sea ice predictors.
Because the new precise observations agree with existing assessments of water vapor's impact, researchers are more confident than ever in
model predictions that Earth's leading greenhouse gas will contribute to a
temperature rise of a few degrees by the end of the century.
The
models are gauged against the following observation - based datasets: Climate
Prediction Center Merged Analysis of Precipitation (CMAP; Xie and Arkin, 1997) for precipitation (1980 — 1999), European Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasts 40 - year reanalysis (ERA40; Uppala et al., 2005) for sea level pressure (1980 — 1999) and Climatic Research Unit (CRU; Jones et al., 1999) for surface
temperature (1961 — 1990).
There are many who will not like this recent paper published in Nature Communications on principle as it talks of the hiatus in global
temperatures for the past 20 years or so, that the Little Ice Age was global in extent, and that climate
models can not account for the observations we already have let alone make adequate
predictions about what will happen in the future.
This
prediction failure has been due to the climate
models assuming that minimum
temperatures (nighttime temps) are driven by atmospheric CO2 levels, resulting in predicted minimum
temperatures that are too high.
Levine, R.C., Turner, A.G., Marathayil, D. and Martin, G.M. (accepted Dec 2012), The role of northern Arabian Sea surface
temperature biases in CMIP5
model simulations and future
predictions of Indian summer monsoon rainfall, in press, Climate Dynamics., DOI 10.1007 / s00382 -012-1656-x link
Another is
temperature predictions from his computer
model show (Figure 3).
Douglass, D. H., Christy, J. R., Pearson, B. D. and Singer, S. F. (2008), A comparison of tropical
temperature trends with
model predictions.
Comparing
model predictions of GHG - induced warming with recent natural
temperature fluctuations also indicates the potential scale of man - made climate change.Early
modelling experiments focused on the total long - term change resulting from a doubling of carbon dioxide (CO2) levels.
Well since the upward trend was well established, and his whole «CO2 causes global warming» theory would be falsified by any other result (constant or decreasing
temperatures) it is hardly surprising that Hansen's
models would produce
predictions of increasing
temperature.
If I'm not mistaken, the
model predictions average
temperature over land and sea.
Scaling factors derived from detection analyses can be used to scale
predictions of future change by assuming that the fractional error in
model predictions of global mean
temperature change is constant (Allen et al., 2000, 2002; Allen and Stainforth, 2002; Stott and Kettleborough, 2002).
And, in case it slipped your notice, NONE of the climate
models have been correct in their
predictions of 21st century
temperature trends.
Prediction: The AGW
models will mis - estimate
temperature, CO2 levels, sea level and sea ice extent with increasing severity.
Sea surface
temperature (SST) measured from Earth Observation Satellites in considerable spatial detail and at high frequency, is increasingly required for use in the context of operational monitoring and forecasting of the ocean, for assimilation into coupled ocean - atmosphere
model systems and for applications in short - term numerical weather
prediction and longer term climate change detection.
Speaking of Hansen's 1988
predictions and GCMs in general, Demetris Koutsoyiannis» paper has been published, evaluating 18 years of climate
model predictions of
temperature and precipitation at 8 locales distributed worldwide.
Additionally, the observed surface
temperature changes over the past decade are within the range of
model predictions (Figure 6) and decadal periods of flat
temperatures during an overall long - term warming trend are predicted by climate
models (Easterling & Wehner 2009).
But that raises the question: If the
temperature plateau continued for another 10 years, would that be enough to cast doubt on the climate computer
model predictions?