Assessment of the first consensus prediction on climate change

Discussion in 'Environment' started by Trakar, Dec 29, 2012.

  1. Trakar
    Offline

    Trakar VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,699
    Thanks Received:
    73
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +73
    Assessment of the first consensus prediction on climate change - http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate1763.html
    Nature Climate Change(2012)(2012)doi:10.1038/nclimate1763
    Received 31 July 2012 Accepted 01 November 2012
    [Abstract]
    In 1990, climate scientists from around the world wrote the First Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. It contained a prediction of the global mean temperature trend over the 1990–2030 period that, halfway through that period, seems accurate. This is all the more remarkable in hindsight, considering that a number of important external forcings were not included. So how did this success arise? In the end, the greenhouse-gas-induced warming is largely overwhelming the other forcings, which are only of secondary importance on the 20-year timescale.


    Professor Frame and Dr. Dáithí Stone, from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California, have produced this report comparing predictions from the first Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Assessment Report published in 1990, with global climate change data gathered over the past 20 years. Their analysis indicates that the global climate is responding largely as predicted by the first IPCC report, which included a range of predictions for global temperature increase to the year 2030. We are now at the midpoint of that period, and the data shows that the actual global mean surface temperature increase has been between 0.35-0.39 degrees Celsius, which is in reasonable agreement with the 1990 predictions. Professor Frame and Dr. Stone have compared the results from these models against observed changes. From the resulting study, it is highly unlikely that recent changes can be accounted for by natural variability alone.
     
  2. westwall
    Offline

    westwall USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Messages:
    23,788
    Thanks Received:
    3,772
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Nevada
    Ratings:
    +4,247
    Thankfully science doesn't concern itself with "consensus" which is a purely political term.
     
  3. Trakar
    Offline

    Trakar VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,699
    Thanks Received:
    73
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +73
    Thankfully, science isn't restricted to your distorted understandings of what is and is not within its purview. But then again, given your posts here, I doubt that many would confuse you for someone who understands any aspect of science, mathematics or reality in general.
     
  4. westwall
    Offline

    westwall USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Messages:
    23,788
    Thanks Received:
    3,772
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Nevada
    Ratings:
    +4,247




    Funny you should mention mathematics.... The AGW high priests never seem to be able to do it correctly.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. RollingThunder
    Offline

    RollingThunder VIP Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    3,321
    Thanks Received:
    265
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +288
    That's certainly one of the myths of your little astro-turfed cult of denial but, as always, it has nothing to do with reality.
     
  6. Trakar
    Offline

    Trakar VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,699
    Thanks Received:
    73
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +73
    Please support this assertion with compelling citation and reference
     
  7. westwall
    Offline

    westwall USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Messages:
    23,788
    Thanks Received:
    3,772
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Nevada
    Ratings:
    +4,247




    Gergis et al.

    "This seems to suggest that Gergis's declaration that the correlations were based on detrended data was false and that she and her co-authors had indeed fallen foul of the circular argument noted above. The finding of unprecedented warmth reported in the Gergis paper appears as though it is a function of the methodology used rather than of the underlying data."


    In other words they screwed up on their math.....

    http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2012/6/7/another-hockey-stick-broken.html
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2012
  8. RollingThunder
    Offline

    RollingThunder VIP Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    3,321
    Thanks Received:
    265
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +288
    LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.....you are too funny, walleyed.....your idea of a "compelling citation and reference" to back up your ridiculous crackpot assertion that climate scientists "never seem to be able to do [mathematics] correctly", is a link to some idiotic pseudo-science article by some unknown nutjob denier cultist on a denier cult blog.....LOLOLOLOL.....you poor clueless retard.....

    In other words, someone screwed up your head.....maybe your parents, or your genetics, or oil corp propagandists, or some combo of those....who knows.....you're just flat out too bamboozled and confused to know which end is up....
     
  9. Old Rocks
    Offline

    Old Rocks Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    34,707
    Thanks Received:
    3,747
    Trophy Points:
    247
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +4,072
    Andrew Montford - SourceWatch


    Andrew W Montford has a degree in Chemistry from St Andrews University, he is behind the Bishop Hill climate skeptic blog. Montford is a Chartered Accountant by trade , living and practicing in Scotland[1]
     
  10. Old Rocks
    Offline

    Old Rocks Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    34,707
    Thanks Received:
    3,747
    Trophy Points:
    247
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +4,072
    Trakar posts from a peer reviewed scientific journal, Walleyes posts from a blog of a person that has no connection with any kind of climate research.
     

Share This Page