The latest batch of climate computer games, CMIP6, on average, will over predict global warming even more than the prior batch, CMIP5, did. The average CMIP5 computer game predicted more than double the global warming rate since 1979 that actually happened (see first chart below). The average computer game temperature rise per CO2 doubling projection, reflects the latest government bureaucrat scientist consensus.
That consensus is obviously wrong, if you assume that accurate global average temperature projections are the goal.
The computer game that over predicts global warming the least -- the Russian INM model -- would get the most attention, if accurate projections were the goal.
The models, as a group, would have become more accurate over the past 40 years, if accurate projections were the goal.
Accurate projections of the future global average temperature are obviously not a goal.
The goal of climate computer games is to produce scary climate predictions that support consensus CO2 beliefs -- CO2 is the "climate control knob", and CO2 is the "devil in the sky".
CO2 is the climate control knob is exactly what people who own and program the computer games believe. And computers project whatever their owners and programmers want to project.
The computer games are actually intended as complex "science-lite" propaganda to support what is now 64 consecutive years of scientists predicting a coming global warming crisis. But there is no climate crisis. They were wrong for 64 years in a row.
Since computer game projections are far from reality, we know the scientists have little knowledge of what CO2 actually does in the atmosphere. Or they don't care.
There is historical evidence that temperature changes, from natural causes, lead to CO2 level changes, with a multi-hundred year lag. That evidence is from Antarctica ice core studies.
There is also evidence that CO2 may have caused the mild, harmless global warming in the past 45 years. At a rate that suggests a doubling of the current CO2 level of 420 ppm, which could take a century, could cause a harmless +1.0 to +1.5 degree C. increase of the global average temperature.
No one knows the exact effect of CO2, to be able to claim certainty about the future climate. But many people do claim they are certain. Most over predict global warming. A few claim CO2 causes no global warming at all. The science is obviously not settled.
Based on actual experience with real global warming since the mid-1970s -- not computer games -- we'd expect climate models to project +1.0 to +1.5 degrees global warming from a doubling of the CO2 level. That's assuming accurate temperature projections were the goal.
Instead, we get CMIP6 model projections that start at +1.8 degrees C. (Russian INM model) and range all the way up to +5.6 degrees C. per CO2 doubling.
I prefer not to average the CMIP6 numbers right now because the computer games are not yet final for the next IPCC report. But they are obviously over predicting global warming, as climate computer games have done for 40 years. They are over predicting warming more than the CMIP5 batch of computer games did.
The next time someone tells you climate science is "settled" (science is actually never settled), you can point out the huge range of warming projections (ECRs) among the latest batch of climate computer games (second chart below) and CMIP6 climate computer game projections versus reality (the last four charts below):
