Interview of John Christy, a climate scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH)

John Raymond Christy 

is a climate scientist 

at the University of Alabama 

in Huntsville (UAH) whose 

chief interests are satellite 

remote sensing of global climate

and global climate change. 

In February 2019 

he was named 

as a member of the 

EPA Science 
Advisory Board.

In May 2019 
he was interviewed

by Grégoire Canlorbe 
for Association 
des climato-réalistes, 

the only climate-realist 

association in France. 

The conversation was 

first published in

the French journal 
Valeurs Actuelles

(in a French edited version), 

and on Friends of Science

(in the original English version).

The full interview is here:
https://blog.friendsofscience.org/2019/06/28/a-conversation-with-john-christy-for-association-des-climato-realistes/

The most interesting 

John Christy comments 

are below:

"I downloaded the output from 

102 climate model simulations 

used by the IPCC and compared 

the tropospheric temperature 

since 1979 between the models 

and several observational datasets, 

including the satellite dataset 

we generate."

The models on average 

were warming the atmosphere 

at a rate significantly greater 

than the observations. 

This is a test result 

from which we can say 

the models failed, and 

thus one shouldn’t 

depend on model output 

to characterize 

the future climate."

"One of the fundamental 

characteristics of the 

scientific method is that 

if we understand a system, 

then we can predict 

the behavior of that system. 

Our work in which 

we compare “predictions” 

from climate models 

against the actual changes 

of the real world indicate 

the current understanding 

of climate change 

is rather poor. 

This understanding is 

certainly not mature enough 

for regulatory policy. 

That certain experts 

and elites refuse to see 

the level of immaturity 

of understanding 

regarding climate,

 is astonishing."

However, 

it is understandable 

since climate is such 

a complex system, it is easier

 and more comforting 

for these elites 

to simply ignore 

the complexity and declare

they believe CO2 is dangerous 

and we should believe them 

because of some status 

of authority they have 

garnered for themselves. 

They claim the 

“Science is Settled” 

only because they have not 

performed the necessary 

scientific tests which 

I believe would lead them 

to the opposite conclusion."

"I also think the average person 

has considerable experience 

regarding the claims 

about a dangerous future 

from so-called experts 

which the average person knows 

are simply exaggerations." 

“As of now, the traditional renewables 

aren’t the answer because they supply

 such little energy relative to the area 

they cover, and they are unable 

to supply energy “on-demand”

 as is required for a modern economy.”