LOL: Cornel West Thinks Gavin Newsom Has a White Supremacist Mindset
Transgender Charged After Shooting at Border Patrol in New Hampshire
Democrats Will Lose Their Minds After JD Vance's Announcement About Minnesota Fraud
Chinese Official Thought ChatGPT Was Private – Now We Know How China Silences...
They Spied on Kash Patel and Susie Wiles – Now They Are Paying...
Lawmakers Grappling With Potential Iran Airstrikes
Following Backlash, Pro-Abortion Professor Withdraws From Notre Dame Appointment
Where's the Backlash? Olympic Hockey Hero Gets a Warm Welcome in New Jersey
Utah Proposal for Citizen Carry Puts Pro-Teams in Crosshairs
Cuban Coast Guard Kills Four, Injures Six on Florida-Registered Speed Boat
Rep. Wesley Hunt Slams Gavin Newsom For His Racist Comments: 'You're Not Like...
If This CA City Elects This Man, It Will Be a New Low...
‘Tax the Jews’ Chants Erupt at San Francisco Mayor’s Tax Reform Press Conference
Report: No Deal yet Between U.S. and Iran Over Nuclear Weapons
Former Air Force Pilot Arrested Over Allegations That He Trained Chinese Military Pilots
OPINION

When Will Climate Scientists Say They Were Wrong?

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
When Will Climate Scientists Say They Were Wrong?

Day after day, year after year, the hole that climate scientists have buried themselves in gets deeper and deeper. The longer that they wait to admit their overheated forecasts were wrong, the more they are going to harm all of science.

Advertisement

The story is told in a simple graph, the same one that University of Alabama’s John Christy presented to the House Committee on Natural Resources on May 15.

C:\Users\PJM\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\IE\I8V0HBPV\MT_GL_102_Models_2.png

The picture shows the remarkable disconnect between predicted global warming and the real world.

The red line is the 5-year running average temperature change forecast, beginning in 1979, predicted by the UN’s latest family of climate models, many of which are the handiwork of our own federal science establishment. The forecasts are for the average temperature change in the lower atmosphere, away from the confounding effects of cities, forestry, and agriculture.

The blue circles are the average lower-atmospheric temperature changes from four different analyses of global weather balloon data, and the green squares are the average of the two widely accepted analyses of satellite-sensed temperature. Both of these are thought to be pretty solid because they come from calibrated instruments.

If you look at data through 1995 the forecast appears to be doing quite well. That’s because the computer models appear to have, at least in essence, captured two periods of slight cooling.

Advertisement

The key word is “appear.” The computer models are tuned to account for big volcanoes that are known to induce temporary cooling in the lower atmosphere. These would be the 1982 eruption of El Chichon in Mexico, and 1992’s spectacular Mt. Pinatubo, the biggest natural explosion on earth since Alaska’s Katmai in 1912.

Since Pinatubo, the earth has been pretty quiescent, so that warming from increasing carbon dioxide should proceed unimpeded. Obviously, the spread between forecast and observed temperatures grows pretty much every year, and is now a yawning chasm.

It’s impossible, as a scientist, to look at this graph and not rage at the destruction of science that is being wreaked by the inability of climatologists to look us in the eye and say perhaps the three most important words in life: we were wrong.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement