Betting Your Future on Computer Models
Computers are a major, if not crucial tool, used by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to predict global warming and climate change from CO2.
But how accurate are these computer models?
The IPCC has gone so far as to devote an entire page on its web site to argue that the models can be relied on, but it’s clear from recent experience that they are not able to predict future temperatures with any degree of accuracy.
(HadCRUT temperatures are compiled by the Hadley center of the UK Met Office.)
(UAH temperatures are compiled by the University of Alabama, Huntsville.)
The HadCRUT and UAH data points are actual temperatures, and they are following the most conservative of the IPCC models. They are also far below the average of all IPCC model results.
Temperatures are actually rising far more slowly than the computer models are predicting.
Yet, it’s the average of all models that is being used to establish the need for cutting CO2 emissions. Some of the more radical environmentalists are using the higher and more extreme forecasts when claiming the need to cut CO2 emissions to prevent a climate catastrophe.
The above chart by Roy Spencer, was criticized by environmental groups for various reasons, but the following chart substantiates its findings.
This chart, composed by Energy Matters, uses the IPCC’s First Assessment Report (FAR) chart in 1990, and superimposes actual temperatures.
(Note that the first chart is until 2030, while the second is until 2100.)
Both demonstrate that actual temperatures are following the most conservative computer projections. Note also, that actual temperatures have risen only 1 degree C over the past 160 years.
The wide divergence in results from various computer models make their results highly suspect.
But we are being asked to make huge sacrifices in our standard of living so as to cut CO2 emissions 80% by 2050, when the reality is that computer models are not providing us with good evidence that CO2 will cause drastic increase in temperatures.
We are also being asked to have a carbon tax applied to the use of fossil fuels.
Once again, computer programs are being used to demonstrate that a carbon tax will curtail CO2 emissions and prevent temperatures from rising dangerously high.
A recent wall Street Journal (WSJ) article cited computer simulations that showed it would be necessary to impose a carbon tax of $425, in today’s dollars, to prevent temperatures from rising over 2 degrees C, the supposed tipping point. According to the article, such a tax would reduce GDP by 5 to 10%.
But even staunch supporters of the need to cut CO2 emissions disagree.
From the WSJ article, “‘The models are biased on the pessimistic side,’ said Joe Romm, senior fellow at the left-leaning think tank Center for American Progress.”
Computers are marvelous tools, and have helped the United States improve its productivity, but computers are subject to human errors, such as developing inaccurate algorithms and using inaccurate data.
We shouldn’t be betting our future on computer models that are subject to the infamous GIGO, garbage in, garbage out.
Especially when their output appears to be wrong, with actual temperature rise far below the projections of the computer models.
* * * * * *
Nothing to Fear, Chapter 4, Why The CO2 Hypothesis is Wrong, explains how atmospheric CO2 has not affected temperatures, using an IPCC chart showing that CO2 has remained constant at 280 ppm prior to 1850, for the previous 2,000 years.
Nothing to Fear is available from Amazon and some independent book sellers.
Link to Amazon: http://amzn.to/1miBhXy
* * * * * *
It’s easy to subscribe to articles by Donn Dears.
Go to the photo on the right side of the article where it says email subscription. Click and enter your email address. You can unsubscribe at any time.
If you know people who would be interested in these articles please send them a link to the article and suggest they also subscribe.
© Power For USA, 2010 – 2015. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author, Donn Dears LLC, is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Power For USA with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.