cancel2 2022
Canceled
Even before the study of human-induced global warming became fashionable, tax dollars had funded a major portion of that research. Government organizations continue to supply the vast majority of the moneys for those research efforts. Yet with the tens of billions of dollars expended over the past couple of decades, there has been little increase in our understanding of what the future might bring.
The recent 5[SUP]th[/SUP] Assessment Report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) proclaims that global surface temperatures are projected to increase through the year 2100, that sea levels will continue to rise, that in some regions rainfall might increase and in others it will decrease, etc. But those were the same basic messages with the 4[SUP]th[/SUP] Assessment Report in 2007, and the 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] Assessment Report in 2001, and the 2[SUP]nd[/SUP] Assessment Report in 1995. So we’ve received little benefit for all of those tax dollars spent over the past few decades.
Those predictions of the future are based on simulations of climate using numerical computer programs known as climate models. Past and projected factors that are alleged to impact climate on Earth (known as forcings) serve as inputs to the models. Then the models, based on more assumptions made by programmers, crunch a lot of numbers and regurgitate outputs that are representations of what the future might hold in store, with the monumental supposition that the models properly simulate climate.
But it is well known that climate models are flawed, that they do not properly simulate climate metrics that are of interest to policymakers and the public—like surface temperatures, precipitation, sea ice area. And in at least one respect the current generation of climate models performs more poorly than the earlier generation. That is, climate models are getting worse, not better, at simulating Earth’s climate.
With that in mind, the following are sample questions that policymakers should be asking climate scientists and agencies who receive government funding for research into human-induced global warming—along with information to support the questions.
Read more: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/...te-scientists-who-receive-government-funding/
The recent 5[SUP]th[/SUP] Assessment Report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) proclaims that global surface temperatures are projected to increase through the year 2100, that sea levels will continue to rise, that in some regions rainfall might increase and in others it will decrease, etc. But those were the same basic messages with the 4[SUP]th[/SUP] Assessment Report in 2007, and the 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] Assessment Report in 2001, and the 2[SUP]nd[/SUP] Assessment Report in 1995. So we’ve received little benefit for all of those tax dollars spent over the past few decades.
Those predictions of the future are based on simulations of climate using numerical computer programs known as climate models. Past and projected factors that are alleged to impact climate on Earth (known as forcings) serve as inputs to the models. Then the models, based on more assumptions made by programmers, crunch a lot of numbers and regurgitate outputs that are representations of what the future might hold in store, with the monumental supposition that the models properly simulate climate.
But it is well known that climate models are flawed, that they do not properly simulate climate metrics that are of interest to policymakers and the public—like surface temperatures, precipitation, sea ice area. And in at least one respect the current generation of climate models performs more poorly than the earlier generation. That is, climate models are getting worse, not better, at simulating Earth’s climate.
With that in mind, the following are sample questions that policymakers should be asking climate scientists and agencies who receive government funding for research into human-induced global warming—along with information to support the questions.
Read more: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/...te-scientists-who-receive-government-funding/
