American Elephants

Can Climate Models Predict Climate Change? by The Elephant's Child

No they can’t. Here’s why. Please listen carefully to Dr. William Happer. There is way too much nonsense floating around out there, largely from politicians who are quite sure that declaring themselves as ‘caring about the environment’ is the way to electoral success. Maybe, but it won’t do much for the climate.

You might also visit Dr.Roy Spencer’s website. He’s the scientist who runs the satellites that give us the world temperatures, and he says that we really don’t understand the action of clouds at all.

Hillary was out making a speech today about the drastic changes in climate ahead, and how it was all going to be a problem for women. I kind of lost interest at that point, and didn’t stick around for the rest of it. Something to do with desertification and women having to pack up and move south.

ADDENDUM: I forgot to add a link to Dr.Roy Spencer’s website, though it is available in the sidebar. Good site to explain the basics of global warming science.Good site for those who want to ‘resist’ the alarmist’s insistence that unbelievers should be sent to detention camps to learn correct thinking.

Models are Models. Science is Something Different. by The Elephant's Child


We are so in love with our computers and what they can do, that we often forget what they cannot do. G.I.G.O.— garbage in garbage out. The climate models on which the panic about global warming depends are only very partly based on science. The models themselves aren’t science. There are some scientific facts that are known and accepted. Once  you get beyond that small amount — all is based on modelling. That means you take the known, add some approximations, some guesswork, and your favorite theory and you get a model of the earth’s climate, that may have little to do with the real world.

“Patrick Michaels and David E. Wojick wrote last week in a Cato at Liberty blog post that modelling completely dominates climate change research” What that means  is that climate change science is only about 4% of the whole, and not all climate science is about climate change. They are putting their faith in math calculations rather than scientific observation. The energy and the resources are directed to improving the models, which have a remarkable record of being consistently wrong.They cannot even accurately predict the climate that has already happened.

We have very little understanding of the action of the clouds, though they clearly effect climate. The heat that the models have predicted has not arrived. In science, there are questions, and a hypothesis is developed, then tested through repeated experimentation.” The federal government has spent billions —close to $100 billion since fiscal 2012 —on “science” that is undergirded by failed models.” The models were unable to predict the greening of the world caused by slight increases in CO2. Most of the money goes to improving and upgrading the models, and what most climate scientists will consider improved models to be those that predict greater amounts of warming.

For a more authoritative explanation of Global Warming go here.

Meet Dr. Roy Spencer, Celebrated Climatologist. by The Elephant's Child
November 25, 2009, 7:15 pm
Filed under: Energy, Environment, Freedom, Science/Technology | Tags: , ,

Dr. Roy Spencer is the U.S. Science Team Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA’s Aqua satellite.  He is also a Principal Research Scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. (Try getting all that on a business card).  They supply the temperatures that we can count on.  He has testified before Congress a number of times, and he is the author of Climate Confusion , a perfectly splendid book that we recommend in the sidebar.

In the book, Dr. Spencer explains in simple terms just how the climate system works and what we know about it and what we don’t know.  No wild claims, a mild voice for a climate skeptic, that much denigrated type of individual, quite a few cartoons, and only a couple of simple graphs — the kind devised for laymen.  It is a good read, and illuminating in the nicest way.

Dr. Spencer has a website where he both talks about the latest global temperature anomaly, but also explains “Global Warming 101.”  He has a great sense of humor as well, as a visit to The Eco Enquirer will show.

Here are a few of his comments on the elitist roots of global warming alarmism:

The hundreds of e-mails being made public after someone hacked into Phil Jones’ Climatic Research Unit (CRU) computer system offer a revealing peek inside the IPCC machine. It will take some time before we know whether any illegal activity has been uncovered (e.g. hiding or destruction of data to avoid Freedom of Information Act inquiries).

Even mainstream journalists, who are usually on board with the latest environmental craze, have commented on this blatant display of hypocrisy. It seems like those participating – possibly the best example being Al Gore — are not even aware of how it looks to the rest of us. (…)

A few of the CRU e-mails suggest that manipulation of climate data in order to reduce the signature of natural climate variations, and to exaggerate the supposed evidence for manmade climate change, is OK with these folks. Apparently, the ends justify the means. (…)

Hopefully, the scientist is more interested in discovering how nature really works, rather than twisting the data to support some other agenda. It took me years to develop the discipline to question every research result I got. It is really easy to be wrong in this business, and very difficult to be right.

Skepticism really is at the core of scientific progress. I’m willing to admit that I could be wrong about all my views on manmade global warming. Can the IPCC scientists admit the same thing?

Year after year, the evidence keeps mounting that most climate research now being funded is for the purpose of supporting the IPCC’s politics, not to find out how nature works. The ‘data spin’ is increasingly difficult to ignore or to explain away as just sloppy science. If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck…

You can find the whole essay here, as well as the guide to Global Warming 101.

%d bloggers like this: