Groeiende divergentie tussen klimaatmodellen en de realiteit

De kloof groeit.

Zoals ik zo vaak heb geschreven wil de ons door klimaatalarmisten aangekondigde verschrikkelijke opwarming van de aarde maar steeds niet komen. De gemiddelde wereldtemperatuur is nu al ruim 17 jaar betrekkelijk stabiel. Protagonisten van de AGW–hypothese (AGW =  'Anthropogenic Global Warming') verwachten elk ogenblik een hervatting van de opwarming. Vele antagonisten, die een belangrijke invloed aan de zon toeschrijven, verwachten binnenkort afkoeling.

Onder de titel, 'Divergence Between Model Temperature And Reality Reaches Record High And Is Now Accelerating!', schreef Pierre Gosselin onlangs op zijn blog:

When it comes to the climate debate, everyone knows that it really all boils down to how much is man’s impact. It has nothing to do with whether climate is changing or not. It always has.

The core question is how accurate are the climate models and are they really accurate enough to use for policymaking?

Skeptics have long argued that the models use a climate sensitivity for a doubling of CO2 that is much too high even preposterously high. The alarmists, on the other hand, insist that it isn’t, and that the models are pretty much on target. Now that climate models have been making predictions for well over 15 years, we now have enough data to make a preliminary call.

If the models are right, then the observed temperature should be following the trend predicted of the ensemble of models. But if the two trends are diverging, then the models are inaccurate and should be revamped. C3 Headlines here has posted a chart comparing observed (blue) to model trend (red):

As the above chart shows, the divergence between modeled temperature and observed is setting new records with every passing month. The divergence for the 36-month moving average is now at about 0.35°C, already an embarrassment for the climate modellers. .

Extrapolating about 10 years out. By 2025, the divergence will be 0.6°C (and even more if the earth cools, which many scientists are projecting).

Pierre Gosselin concludeert:

What does this all mean? Should the trend continue over the next decade or so, the error will be greater with each passing year, and it won’t be long before it’s glaring. Even the trickiest graphic layouts and chart manipulations soon will not be able to hide the gaping difference.

So even if the current decade manages to be a little warmer than the last, the model error will still be sticking out more than ever.

Time is truly on the side of the skeptics. For the alarmists, it is running out – fast!

Lees verder hier

Men kan zich vertwijfeld afvragen wanneer de beleidsmakers nu eindelijk conclusies gaan trekken uit het feit dat Moeder Natuur zich maar niet wil conformeren aan de uitkomsten van de klimaatmodellen en de samenleving verlossen van de megaverspilling van het klimaatbeleid. 'All pain and no gain!'

Voor mijn eerdere DDS–bijdragen zie hier.