What you are saying is simply not true.
Hansen created three different scenarios and attached a prediction to each. In Scanario A, he projected that CO2 would increase at a rate that tracks almost exactly with the readings from Mauna Loa through 2009. The B and C scenarios had lesser increases in CO2.
Decreasing from the frying pan increase of Scenario A's Prediction of Temperature increase to the much less alarming and hardly panicky at all increase of Scenario C's Prediction, the 3 scenarios were presented to Congress and subsequently picked up by Al Gore to hype in sensationalized and often erroneous presentations.
Interestingly, all of the predictions based on the Scenarios outpaced the actual Climate performance owing to an unanticipated cooling which is always left off by those claiming that the predictions were right.
At some point, no matter how beautiful the theory, the results must be examined.
Below, please find links to an article and excerpt from that article which show the salient points of the Hansen predictions and the erroneous conclusions.
The Hansen Model: Another very simple disproof of Anthropogenic Global Warming. Debunk House
From Appendix B, pg. 9361 of Hansen’s 1998 paper…
“Specifically, in scenario A CO2 increases as observed by Keeling for the interval 1958-1981 [keeling et al, 1982] and subsequently with a 1.5%/yr growth of the annual increment.”
“In scenario B the growth of the annual increment of CO2 is is reduced from 1.5%/yr today to 1%/yr in 1990, 0.5%/yr in 2000 and 0 in 2010; thus after 2010 is constant, 1.9 ppmv/yr.”
“In scenario C the CO2 growth is the same as scenarios A and B through 1985; between 1985 and 2000 the annual increment is fixed at 1.5 ppmv/yr; after 2000, CO2 ceases to increase, its abundance remaining fixed at 368 ppmv.”
http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k247/dhm1353/Hansen1988CO2.png
http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k247/dhm1353/Climate Change/HansenvUAH.png
Last edited:
