Total Pageviews

Saturday, March 2, 2019

Austrian scientists criticize the always wrong climate models

Any climate scientist 
who openly contradicts 
or questions the leftist 
"climate consensus” 
can ruin his career, 
and get excluded 
from project funding 
opportunities. 

It's common for scientists 
who are skeptical to 
protect their wallets
by keeping quiet until 
after they retire, and 
start their pensions.

So it's surprising that
Austrian scientists in the
Austrian Zentralanstalt 
für Meteorologie und 
Geodynamik (ZAMG) 
have criticized the 
always wrong 
climate models !

On the ZAMG’s website, 
the Vienna-Austria-based 
scientists discuss important 
criticisms: 
( sentences below have been translated ):

"Future natural climate drivers 
are not accounted for.

If the share of individual 
climate drivers in the 
development of global 
temperature are misjudged 
by climate models, 
and even if they delivered 
a realistic result thus far, 
future simulations 
will be wrong. 

In addition, beside the 
anthropogenic (man made) one, 
other climate drivers 
in future scenarios 
are not even accounted for. 

They just cannot be predicted.

One problem with the 
global climate models 
is the model focus 
on the reproduction 
of the measured global 
mean temperature. 

Although this is relatively 
well simulated, there are 
concerns as to whether
the models’ sensitivity 
to the different 
climate drivers 
(solar activity, 
volcanic aerosols, 
greenhouse gases, etc.) 
corresponds to reality.

In addition, the drivers are 
not understood properly, 
even with their warming 
or cooling effect. 

So it is possible that 
a climate model 
correctly simulates 
the mean global temperature
 – even with incorrect 
sensitivities with respect 
to its drivers.

Is the anthropogenic (man made) 
climate driver overrated ?

The 4th Assessment Report 
of the (UN's) IPCC 
(Solomon et al. 2007) 
notes that warming 
in the second half 
of the 20th century 
was “very likely” 
caused by the increase in 
anthropogenic (man made)
greenhouse gas 
concentrations. 

This statement is based 
on the simulations from 
a variety of global 
climate models. 

Critics, however, say the models 
have too high a sensitivity for CO2
as a driver and, for example, 
underestimate the influence 
of the sun."