• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

Scientists admit climate models are junk

Spike

Regular Member
Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2014
Messages
24,914
Reaction score
11,537
Points
113
Climate forecasts may be flawed, says study


Predictions of unprecedented rainfall extremes in the 20th century driven by global warming turned out wrong, a study said Wednesday, casting doubt on methods used to project future trends.

A massive trawl of Northern Hemisphere rainfall data for the last 1,200 years revealed there had been more dramatic wet-dry weather extremes in earlier, cooler centuries before humans set off fossil fuel-driven global warming.

This is problematic, said a study in the journal Nature, as the same data models used to anticipate that global warming would cause record rainfall extremes in the 1900s, are the basis for projections of things to come.

"It might be more difficult than often assumed to project into the future," the study's lead author Fredrik Ljungqvist of Stockholm University told AFP of the findings.

"The truth can be much, much more complicated."

The UN's climate science panel, the consensus authority, contends that dry areas will become ever drier and wet ones wetter as the global temperature rises in response to greenhouse gas emissions.

But the new work said sky-high temperatures in the 20th century did not directly translate into record extremes between wet and dry weather, as many had expected.

This meant that "much of the change is not only driven by temperature, but some internal, more random variability," explained Ljungqvist.

"It's therefore very, very hard also to predict (precipitation extremes) with models."

Over the study period, drought was most severe during the 12th century, which was a warm one, and the 15th which was cold, said the scientist.

https://in.news.yahoo.com/climate-forecasts-may-flawed-says-170007812.html

--------------------------

FLAWED???? The hell you say. Computer models are PERFECT!

Climate deniers are criminals! They must be punished!
 
paging FauxcaJewNubianfie, please report to this thread to show how this is wrong, but right and wrong and right but depending on the degree of wrong makes it right even though it's wrong.
 
paging FauxcaJewNubianfie, please report to this thread to show how this is wrong, but right and wrong and right but depending on the degree of wrong makes it right even though it's wrong.

She's a JewFrican Indian. Or he is. Get it right or wrong.
 
paging FauxcaJewNubianfie, please report to this thread to show how this is wrong, but right and wrong and right but depending on the degree of wrong makes it right even though it's wrong.

I looked up the lead author of this study.

First thing FauxcaJewNubianfie will say is that the lead author Fredrik Ljungqvist is a damn history professor making him unqualified. Disappointing to me as well.
http://su-se.academia.edu/FredrikCharpentierLjungqvist

HOWEVER, this academic had written books about how climate change affected mankind throughout history, placing him and others like him into that misleading 97% of "scientists" that agree on global warming.

What do you say climate change fear mongers'? Either he knows what hes talking about or he doesn't.
 
Last edited:
What's the BFD?

All of the great minds on SN have been saying this for years.
 
Predictive rain fall amounts is a poor indication of global warming. Rising ocean temperatures are a much better determinant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MTC
I'm going to point this out once more... the numbers they look at are often utterly wrong... they try to use reported numbers and procedures that in some cases are off up to 20 to 30% because in some cases the methods to determine them aren't meant to be precise, just a rough estimate to calculate molecular weight of stack gas... , then they take the most extreme examples to formulate their models and wonder why they are never even close. Ultimately all of this comes down to people invested in alternate energy sources trying to make them profitable earlier than the tech right now will allow. If they were really concerned about MMGW at all, they wouldn't be selling all of the pollution heavy coal overseas and would never ever allow offshore mining of Methane pockets,( like this administration has ok'd... because while its a stretch to make CO2 actually tip the scales to GW, its not that big a stretch to see it actually happen with several huge methane releases, and it is hypothesized that some of the pockets under the sea bed may have that quantity of the gas... and we know oil and gas companies never have breaches or leaks...
 
Hey, it's such a simple solution. You want warm? Move to Arizona or Florida. Want Cold, move to Alaska or Canada.

These will remain steady in most climate change models.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MTC
Hey, it's such a simple solution. You want warm? Move to Arizona or Florida. Want Cold, move to Alaska or Canada.

These will remain steady in most climate change models.

^^^
This

In some areas you will have periods of uncanny weather. But nature is just nature. Unpredictable. Just another case of liberals wanting to spread their agenda for their own purpose
 
If they pull this one off it could be the biggest scam ever perpetrated on the masses. Carbon credits my ***.
 
but, if there's a governmental agency that is put in place for this particular reason, you know then whom to protest.

easy, peasy.
 
And only an ignoramus would deny the compelling accuracy of climate models:

christy_dec8.jpg


******* CONservative thermometers.
 
Sea level rise has been estimated to be on average between +2.6 millimetres (0.10 in) and 2.9 millimetres (0.11 in) per year ± 0.4 millimetres (0.016 in) since 1993.

So about a 1/10 of an inch since 1993, or a 1/10 of an inch in the past 23 years!

Global warming has a lot to do with sun activity, and a host of other details. While the ice is getting thinner in some areas, 20 miles away it's thickening in another.

The left would be better served to focus on air pollution.
 
Where's PoloElfie? Isn't he a little late to the show?

OEw09Fn.jpg
 
Last edited:
But...but Barry says the answer is in sustainable stuff.

Germany Breaks Renewable Energy Record
http://ecowatch.com/2015/07/30/germany-breaks-renewable-energy-record/

Germany’s transition from coal- and oil-fired power to carbon-free electricity hit a new milestone on July 25 when solar, wind, and other sources of renewable energy met 78 percent of the day’s energy demand.

Renewable energy in Germany
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_Germany

Germany's renewable energy sector is among the most innovative and successful worldwide. Net-generation from renewable energy sources in the German electricity sector has increased from 6.3% in 2000 to about 30% in 2014. For the first time ever, wind, biogas, and solar combined accounted for a larger portion of net electricity production than brown coal in the first half of 2014. While peak-generation from combined wind and solar reached a new all-time high of 74% in April 2014, wind power saw its best day ever on December 12, 2014, generating 562 GWh. Germany has been called "the world's first major renewable energy economy".

More than 23,000 wind turbines and 1.4 million solar PV systems are distributed all over the country's area of 357,000 square kilometers. As of 2011, Germany's federal government is working on a new plan for increasing renewable energy commercialization, with a particular focus on offshore wind farms. A major challenge is the development of sufficient network capacities for transmitting the power generated in the North Sea to the large industrial consumers in southern parts of the country.

According to official figures, some 370,000 people were employed in the renewable energy sector in 2010, especially in small and medium-sized companies. This is an increase of around 8% compared to 2009 (around 339,500 jobs), and well over twice the number of jobs in 2004 (160,500). About two-thirds of these jobs are attributed to the Renewable Energy Sources Act

Germany's energy transition, the Energiewende, designates a significant change in energy policy from 2011. The term encompasses a reorientation of policy from demand to supply and a shift from centralized to distributed generation (for example, producing heat and power in very small cogeneration units), which should replace overproduction and avoidable energy consumption with energy-saving measures and increased efficiency.
 
Germany Breaks Renewable Energy Record
http://ecowatch.com/2015/07/30/germany-breaks-renewable-energy-record/

Germany’s transition from coal- and oil-fired power to carbon-free electricity hit a new milestone on July 25 when solar, wind, and other sources of renewable energy met 78 percent of the day’s energy demand.

Renewable energy in Germany
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_Germany

Understand, that which you post about Tibs. You Libs will buy into, literally, anything. I bet you will STILL say somehow, after reading below, this is good for Germany and Germans.

http://americanenergyalliance.org/2015/05/07/germanys-green-energy-failure/

Germany’s feed-in tariff was established in 1991 as part of the Electricity Feed-in Act. The law mandates that renewables “have priority on the grid and that investors in renewable must receive sufficient compensation to provide a return on their investment irrespective of electricity prices on the power exchange.” This means utilities are forced to buy electricity from renewable sources at above market rates— regardless of whether or not it is needed. The feed-in tariff was extended for another 20 years in 2000.

It’s true that Germany has increased their use of renewables and now generates over 25 percent of its electricity from renewables, with wind and solar making up nearly 15 percent of total electricity production. But this transition has come at a huge cost to the German people. The Institute for Energy Research (IER) outlined some of these costs in a study, finding that:

- Residential German electricity prices are nearly three times higher than electricity prices in the U.S.
- As many as 800,000 Germans have had their power cut off because of an inability to pay for rising energy costs.
- The cost to expand transmission networks to integrate renewables stands at $33.6 billion, which grid operators say accounts “for only a fraction of the cost of the energy transition.”


If Germans aren’t benefitting from Energiewende, then who is?

As the IER study points out, the feed-in tariff is a lucrative subsidy for renewable energy producers. For example, in 2009 the feed-in tariff price for photovoltaic solar was eight times more than the wholesale price of electricity.

Germans’ bloated energy bills are also subsidizing industries in other countries. In his piece, Friedman quotes Ralf Fücks, the president of the German Green Party’s political foundation, as saying, “In my view, the greatest success of the German energy transition was giving a boost to the Chinese solar panel industry.”
 
Understand, that which you post about Tibs. You Libs will buy into, literally, anything. I bet you will STILL say somehow, after reading below, this is good for Germany and Germans.

I'm sorry, I refuse to take anything put out by the "The American Energy Alliance" seriously. Feel free to be bamboozled by the billionaires of the Petrol-Oil-Coal industry. Their clear (self)interest is to oppose all forms of sustainable energy.

The American Energy Alliance (AEA) describes itself as "the independent grassroots affiliate of the Institute for Energy Research (IER). AEA’s mission is to enlist and empower energy consumers to encourage policymakers to support free market policies. These policies lead to abundant, affordable, and reliable energy for all Americans."[1] It was founded in 2008 by Thomas Pyle, who previously lobbied on behalf of the National Petrochemical and Refiners Association and Koch Industries and who previously worked for Congressman Tom Delay (R-TX), when Delay served as Whip and before Delay, as House Majority Leader, stepped down from the U.S. House of Representatives under an ethical cloud.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/American_Energy_Alliance

AEA was founded by the National Association of Manufacturers and the American Petroleum Institute to fight the BTU tax proposal in 1993, and in recent years funded by ExxonMobil and Koch Industries. AEA has been active in the climate debate, from running ads repeating false claims about the costs of climate legislation to trashing clean energy at town halls around the US.

IER supported and promoted the “Spanish” and “Danish” studies critical of clean energy jobs, both of which have been debunked by credible sources. IER also argues that efforts to curb global warming would accomplish little at too great a cost, promotes ACCF/NAM and Heritage Foundation studiesthat exaggerate the costs of climate policy, and discourages U.S. leadership on the international stage.

http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/globa...gy-research-ier-american-energy-alliance-aea/
 
Last edited:
Germany Breaks Renewable Energy Record
http://ecowatch.com/2015/07/30/germany-breaks-renewable-energy-record/

Germany’s transition from coal- and oil-fired power to carbon-free electricity hit a new milestone on July 25 when solar, wind, and other sources of renewable energy met 78 percent of the day’s energy demand.

Renewable energy in Germany
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_Germany

What isn't written here is to do this you have to restrict energy use and raise costs significantly... renewables are extremely erratic... a wind or solar farm that produces 100 megawatts (that's huge for wind or solar, but a drop in the bucket for any of the other forms) can only pledge like 1% to the grid at any given time because sustainability is always suspect... so when Germany boasts 70%+ RE use, its more because the usage is way down more than megawatts are sufficiently up....

Every plan I have heard of always comes with the idea of cutting energy usage in this country... not building more renewables to sustain what we use here...
 
Top