Crossroads
Active member
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2012
- Messages
- 408
- Reaction score
- 70
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Read more: Climate models wildly overestimated global warming, study finds | Fox News
how many times does a science need to be wrong before they lose all creditability?
114 being wrong out of 117 is a very piss poor record. all the scientist that where wrong need to have their funding pulled and only allow the 3 that where roughly right to continue with their research. just think of all the money that would be saved by not supporting the junk science of the 114 that was wrong
Here is something that might help explain this.
La Niña-like conditions behind gentler global warming, study finds
Why is the slower warming a surprise?
The warming slow down has perplexed scientists, as climate model projections projected a swift and steady rise in temperatures over the last one to two decades.
An independent commentary published today in the journal Nature Climate Change proposes an explanation: computer models have a poor handle on the cycle of La Niñas and El Niños and other possible factors which, along with greenhouse gases, have governed the course of recent temperatures.
The commentary “Overestimated global warming over the past 20 years” notes observed warming is much less than projected by models used by the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Despite the slow down in warming, temperatures have not ceased climbing. This fact is especially apparent when examining recent trends in temperatures binned according to whether it’s a La Niña, El Niña or neutral year (neither La Niña or El Niño).