Well, 30 years ago it was predicted that world average surface temperatures would today be about 0.6 degrees (Celsius) warmer, and today it is about....0.6 degrees (Celsius) warmer (under a "some effort to reduce greenhouse gasses scenario", which has happened).
Unfortunately, some of the predictions on things like melting of glaciers and arctic shelves did not take into account changes to currents from less salinity, and fewer reflected rays from less "white" surface, so these have melted at a higher rate than predicted.
We have plenty of excuses already for meddling with lives (only recently the Australian people said it was not appropriate to meddle with who you personally choose to marry, and the government, with notable exceptions such as our PM, was dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century and stopped meddling in that particular aspect), confiscating wealth (I am taxed at a much higher rate than many wealthy "business owners", such as our awesome local minister for water corruption, who set up an offshore business to take his $50 million dollar inside deal from his coalition mates, thus avoiding tax, which would have gone to supporting the nearby private schools for the wealthy nearly as much as to the local public school for the disabled that my son goes to), and suppressing freedom (such as locking up children to prevent people smuggling, with no evidence that it does that, and then threatening aid providers with jail if they report on the terrible conditions those children are in, even kicking them out of their jobs with no due process, suggesting they are coercing asylum seekers into asking for medical help, if they dare highlight the sexual abuse and torture facing locked up children). This government has shown it has no problems doing any of those things, it doesn't need the excuse.
Well here’s a petition by 9000 PhD holders and 31000 in total
http://www.petitionproject.org/?mod=article_inline
Claiming there are no dissenters to agw is as silly as claiming there isn’t a huge body of scientists subscribing to agw
Well there you go. If everyone was as smart as you we could all relax.It helps when you adjust past temperatures down.
They also said there would be no snow in England and parts of San Francisco underwater, amongst a host of other shit.
Gee you don’t mind posting waffle
I only could be bothered addressing your first sentence
The models ran hot
That is not controversial even your most “ world is gunna end” climatologist admits this
You are not even aware of this so waffling about the science is a bit embarrassing for you
Good in depth response.
There have been many, many models, and the best summation is that they were about right. But there have certainly been ones that "ran hot" and others that underestimated warming.
Briefly, this article (https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-well-have-climate-models-projected-global-warming) outlines some models and finds:
A 1975 model that overestimated warming compared to observations by about 30%
A 1981 model that underestimated by about 20%
A 1988 model that overestimated by about 30% (this is probably the one most talk about, as it was the famous 1988 "Hansen" model that was deceptively shown by famous deniers to be 300% wrong by using misleading data)- there are a number of caveats to the "overestimation" by 30%, but in general, it was pretty good for a model that tried to account for a broad range of human responses to global warming. Warming, and our actions, definitely fall between the minimum warming we do everything we can scenario, and the maximum warming we geometrically increase CO2 emissions, models.
A 1990 model that overestimates by 17%
A 1995 model that underestimates by 25%
A 2001 model that underestimates by 14%
A 2007 model that overestimates by 8%
and a 2013 model that overestimates by 16% or 9% depending on which factors you agree ameliorate the overestimating.
Of course long term models are not 100% accurate. Some confounding factors include solar output (which has reduced recently, but no one can predict that at present), volcanic activity (which is hard to predict), increase use or aerosols (which had not been predicted), and the precise levels of greenhouse gasses produced (even events like our last election, which was not well predicted the day it was run, can affect our greenhouse gasses).
But they are all pointing in the same direction. In 30 years, if you are lucky enough to be alive, and lucky enough to have grandchildren, you are going to be very embarrassed by your Ostrich behaviour when they ask you what our generation did about global warming.
And the s&*t won't really hit the fan for many more years after that, but in 30 years only anti vaxers and creationists will be the sorts of people dumb enough to deny climate change as the world average temperatures will be 1.5 to 2 degrees warmer if we don't do much/anything about greenhouse gasses (assuming we don't have a nuclear winter, massive volcanic disruption etc- the climate models can't predict those things).
Yeah I don't think many people deny climate change
It's always changed , it's not something new.
Yeah I don't think many people deny climate change
It's always changed , it's not something new.
Yes obviously everthing is fine . Sorry I ever doubted your judgement. Carry on.Would you bring grand kids into this doomed world? Crazy if you do with all us deniers running about, planning how we going to kill them
Maybe not, butWould you bring grand kids into this doomed world? Crazy if you do with all us deniers running about, planning how we going to kill them
Think your getting the terms Ecological and Climate Change mixed up.
Okay no worries . Im sorry I ever questioned your wisdom. carry on
ok so richard lindzen and judith curry are 'crap ones' despite being some of the most cited climatologists in history
and i suppose chris landsea is corrupt?
ok so richard lindzen and judith curry are 'crap ones' despite being some of the most cited climatologists in history
and i suppose chris landsea is corrupt?
I'm sorry all the disasters predicted haven't materialised , cheer up though there's plenty of time , earth is only 4.54 billion years old, could take more than a 100 years.
lolJudith curry .... Receives ongoing funding from Fossil fuel industry
Chris Landsea Resigned due to peers making unsubstantiated but Authoritative statements that would damage credibility of real Science ... Laudible I guess . Also appointed by George bush to Quell some of fear mongering afterr Hurricane Katrina Debatable that one ... getting a little too close to politics maybe. Might have to question the objectivity . ?
In my very" scientific "Google search I ran across some quotes almost exactly the same as your intelligent ,non Tabloid pearls of Wisdom such as your dismissal of Consensus. NO its not "science " and I never said it was but you are simply Obfuscating anyway,using Googled stuff from American Rightwing sceptics. and have no real.understanding of Scientific Method or Statistical Analysis anyway I never read tabloids BTW . I( read reports in Agricultural Magazines. Used to read New Scientist and Australian Geographic and National Geographic . No time anymore . Shouldnt even be wasting time here Im not a scientist and dont pretend to be but I do recognise Tripe when i see or hear it..