Professor Kevin Walsh. Source University of Melbourne, Fair Use, Low Resolution Image to Identify the Subject.

Have Embarrassing Failed Predictions Taught Climate Scientists to be Cautious?

Essay by Eric Worrall

“… It is difficult to predict whether changes in cyclone formation and behaviour will pose a risk to Australia …”

Tropical cyclones in Australia: How severe are they, and what impact will climate change have on them?

By Emily Bennett 7:09am Dec 11, 2022

Tropical cyclones have killed hundreds of Australians and caused billions of dollars in damage – and we’ve been warned they’re only going to get worse.

With another cyclone season upon us, what lies ahead for our region in the coming months?

Is the number of cyclones predicted to increase due to climate change?

The total number of cyclones in Australia is predicted to decrease – but that’s not the full story.

Climate models project an increase in the proportion of high-intensity storms, with stronger winds and higher rainfall, according to the Earth Systems and Climate Change Hub.

University of Melbourne expert Professor Kevin Walsh agrees with the modelling.

“The most likely outcome for the future frequency of tropical cyclones in the Australian region is a slight decrease,” Walsh said.

It is difficult to predict whether changes in cyclone formation and behaviour will pose a risk to Australia, according to Walsh.

“The possibility exists that tropical cyclones might strike slightly further south than they do at present, but the most vulnerable regions will still remain the more populated regions of the tropical coasts,” he said.

Read more: https://www.9news.com.au/national/tropical-cyclones-australia-natural-disaster-frequency-severity-death-toll-damage-bill-climate-change-impact-explained/3895a34b-8ca1-4b02-afb5-e831ebc04e96

This isn’t the only note of caution we’ve seen lately. Who can forget Professor Pitman’s disclosure that climate science cannot us whether droughts will become more or less likely? Though Pitman later qualified his statement “there is no link between climate change and drought”, claiming what he meant to say was “there is no direct link between climate change and drought”.

Link between climate change and drought
h/t JoNova – a slide from Professor Pitman’s presentation in June 2019

We still get a few entertaining academics from time to time, who throw caution to the winds – like UNSW academic Dr. Clara Stephens, who in 2020 predicted “… even if we get heavier downpours in the future, they won’t necessarily produce the floods we rely on to fill dams …”.

Bad timing Clara – 2022 has been a year of extreme rainfall and floods, thanks to a rare triple La Nina. Probably Clara meant starting from 2023, right?

Of course, climate scientists have been quick to blame the 2022 rainfall on climate change.

Don’t be distracted by all this apparent inconsistency. Climate change is such settled science, in 2021 Naomi Oreskes called for WG1 to be defunded, so more resources could be directed to mitigation efforts. If climate science wasn’t so settled, climate scientists would be making all sorts of incorrect and outright wrong predictions.

4.9 33 votes
Article Rating
64 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
ScienceABC123
December 12, 2022 2:07 pm

“End of Worlders” never learn from their failed predictions, they simply change their signage to a new date, while still walking their same beat.

MarkH
Reply to  ScienceABC123
December 12, 2022 2:44 pm

Their behavior is all but indistinguishable from a doomsday cult. When the prophesized date inevitably comes and goes, the cult leader will make some excuses, revise the date and double down. These things don’t generally end well, and the “Catastrophic Global Warming” cult is significantly larger than almost any doomsday cult in recent history. This makes them very dangerous to wider society.

Rud Istvan
Reply to  MarkH
December 12, 2022 3:02 pm

That’s because they have gotten so much tied up in it. Academic careers, research grant, renewable subsidies… Most doomsday cults are a few hundred ‘believers’ and a few million bucks. Not millions of ‘believers’ and billions of bucks.

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  MarkH
December 12, 2022 4:55 pm

******************

117a-daily-dependence-the-end-is-near-comic.jpg
Hoyt Clagwell
Reply to  ScienceABC123
December 12, 2022 3:42 pm

You reminded men of our local pizza restaurant that had a sign on the wall reading,”Free Beer Tomorrow!”

Redge
Reply to  Hoyt Clagwell
December 12, 2022 10:43 pm

The sign should be updated to “Free reliable wind and solar power, tomorrow

ClimateBear
Reply to  ScienceABC123
December 12, 2022 8:30 pm

Reading/listening to any of ‘the usual suspects’ regarding global warming/climate change is about as convincing as those on line gambling app advertisements. Pure, self serving horse manure.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  ClimateBear
December 13, 2022 5:18 am

Out-of-Control Gamblers need: Gamblers Anonymous

and

Out-of-Control Human-caused Climate Change Alarmists need: Human-caused Climate Change Anonymous.

Both groups need to purge themselves of their destructive thoughts and actions and come back to reality. They will feel a lot better about their lives afterwards.

Ron Long
December 12, 2022 2:16 pm

Failed predictions are the same as Alinsky’s Rules for Radials, if you are caught in a lie, tell a bigger one and keep going.

Rud Istvan
December 12, 2022 2:17 pm

The alarmists have a basic problem. All their previous specific alarms failed.

  1. Sea level rise did not accelerate.
  2. Arctic summer sea ice did not disappear.
  3. Glacier National Park still has glaciers.
  4. UK children still know snow.

Their ‘falsification’ solution now has two parts: (a) be vague about timing and (b) hedge, as here. The problem with their solution is that it is no longer alarming.

Jack
Reply to  Rud Istvan
December 13, 2022 9:12 am

The sea level rise according to the tide gauges is only half that purported by the satellites and do not accelerate.

Tom Halla
December 12, 2022 2:27 pm

Failures have no consequences.John Holdren, a collaborator and co-author with Paul Ehrlich, was Obama’s science advisor.

Rud Istvan
Reply to  Tom Halla
December 12, 2022 2:40 pm

Perhaps true in the short run. But certainly not in the long run when reputational ‘history’ gets written. Ehrlich is thoroughly discredited—his ‘population bomb’ bombed. Mann is now ‘A disgrace to the profession’. Summer Arctic sea ice is now measured in Wadhams’ (1 Wadham is 1 million square kilometers—this years summer Arctic sea ice minimum was 4.7 Wadhams) in honor of Prof.Wadhams who predicted it would be gone by 2014 or so.
One of Alinsky’s rules for radicals (paraphrased) is ‘ridicule is the best weapon’. Another is ‘make them live up to their own game.’ Both apply to climate alarmists, since us skeptics are the radicals going against the establishment ‘settled’ climate science.

Tom Halla
Reply to  Rud Istvan
December 12, 2022 2:48 pm

I am not quite as sangine. Rachel Carson is still trotted out as some sort of prophet, despite being almost as mistaken as Erhlich.
Mann is still working, despite being a joke to anyone who follows alternative media.
It is the media catering to the low information voters that matter, at least in the short term.

Rud Istvan
Reply to  Tom Halla
December 12, 2022 3:13 pm

Tom, I see Rachel Carson and ‘Silent Spring’ a bit differently. She was partly right, but overcooked it. For example, US raptors made a resurgence after DDT was throttled.
Yes, Mann is still a full prof at Penn State, but with tenure they are stuck with him. Ditto Oreskes at Harvard—but they forever lost my until then considerable alumni contributions as a consequence. The ‘major gifts’ gang stopped coming annually for me to treat them to a nice lunch or dinner after they did not take my hints and we had a couple of brutally honest meetings.

megs
Reply to  Rud Istvan
December 12, 2022 3:44 pm

Here in Australia Flim Flam Flannery is still a government advisor even after being proven wrong time after time over decades.

I don’t understand why governments can’t see that their ‘advisors’ her in Australia are all of the extreme left. To the point that our major conservative political party don’t even realise just how far left they’ve gone. The bureaucrats are running our country now. It wouldn’t matter who was in power the ‘unelected’ are the ones who run the circus. The greens are well and truly firmly entrenched.

We have very few politicians who research policies themselves, they rely on their ‘advisors’ to the point that many have the power to rubber stamp issues that favour their interests. Even though covid is pretty much a non issue now, parliament has been almost empty all year. Just a handful of stalwart politicians who actually do care speaking to an empty room.

Politics in this country is a joke! Except it’s not in the least bit funny.

eastbaylarry
Reply to  megs
December 12, 2022 8:41 pm

The bureaucrats are running our country now”
In the US we call them the “Deep State”

Graeme4
Reply to  megs
December 13, 2022 2:50 am

And heavy and continuous rain in Australia can be measured in Flanneries.
And of course Australia had its “Ship of Fools”, stuck in Antarctic sea ice while on a mission to prove that ice in Antarctica was melting more.

megs
Reply to  Graeme4
December 13, 2022 3:00 am

Yes, that would be the rain that will never again fill our dams. Along with the disappearing snow that our children would never witness. The geothermal he recommended to the tune of 90 million dollars didn’t work out either.

I’m sure there’s more. Yet he is still advising the government!

Scissor
Reply to  Rud Istvan
December 12, 2022 5:30 pm

Michael Mann is Ivy League now, University of Pennsylvania.

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  Scissor
December 12, 2022 10:03 pm

Did he move? He was, and I think still is, at The Pennsylvania State University, in State College, Pennsylvania, not at The University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia.

MarkW
Reply to  Rud Istvan
December 12, 2022 8:20 pm

US raptors were recovering years before DDT was “throttled”. It was laws restricting hunting that resulted in their recovery.
There was never any evidence that DDT played a role in the thinning of eggs, the one “study” that found a relationship was a complete fraud.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Tom Halla
December 13, 2022 5:36 am

“It is the media catering to the low information voters that matter, at least in the short term.”

I agree.

The Elite Media is the most dangerous organization in the Western world because they tell lies and create false realities which cause low-information voters to vote against their own best interests, thinking they are doing just the opposite because they have been misled by the Media.

Currently, the Leftwing Media is censoring the TwitterGate Files by completely ignoring the story. All the people who watch those news organizations have no idea what is going on in the real world concering TwitterGate or anything else.

The Elites/Swamp Critters running this country are manipulating the public for their own political purposes, their chief instrument being the Leftwing Media, and that purpose is to acquire political power and keep it in perpetuity by lying to the Public.

They have been dangerously successful at their task. They are almost to the point where they can take our personal freedoms away from us with impunity. Almost. Republicans need to grow a spine, or we are cooked.

The Republicans are talking a good game. Let’s see how that works out when the entire universe of the radical Left comes down on their heads, and you can bet that is what is going to happen.

The Leftwing Media is going to smear Republicans with the intensity they used to smear Trump. Trump stood up to the pressure and gave as good as he got. Let’s see if these Republican House members have the same mettle. Let’s hope they do for all our sakes, even the stupid Democrat voters who don’t know any better.

B Zipperer
Reply to  Tom Halla
December 13, 2022 5:50 pm

Tom:
Yes. Cato did a book length review “Silent Spring at 50” [2012] for the 59th anniversary of Carson’s book. IIRC “chemical muckracking” was a common description of her book by the editors of the review.
Carson made lots of errors, even granting her the limited knowledge of the day. Errors of both omission and comission. But the impact of the book on the environmental movement was profound. For good and ill.

gyan1
December 12, 2022 2:30 pm

Having abandoned the scientific method, Most Climate “scientists” aren’t even capable of believing their absurd assumptions could be wrong. They think invalidated model projections trump empirical data.

SteveG
Reply to  gyan1
December 12, 2022 11:57 pm

Worse still, some would posit that output from the models is…data..In fact, that is what drives Nut-Zero and every other CAGW illogical green policy. The policy makers truly think that the models are the “truth”.

gyan1
Reply to  SteveG
December 13, 2022 10:31 pm

Even worse, Erroneous model output is treated as unquestionable truth.

mleskovarsocalrrcom
December 12, 2022 2:40 pm

The twattle will continue being published as long as the MSM is provided with juicy “facts”. The “facts” will continue as long as the providers are being paid. No one, especially in Australia, can take these prognostications seriously one way or the other.

Moriarty
December 12, 2022 2:41 pm

Have Embarrassing Failed Predictions Taught Climate Scientists to be Cautious?

Yes, they learned only engage with people who agree with them.

Rud Istvan
December 12, 2022 2:53 pm

Another positive thought triggered by this post. It took about 40 years to get where we are:

  1. Failed alarmist predictions.
  2. Enough renewable penetration to prove they are ruinables.
  3. 27 COP failures to make any difference.

I don’t think it will take another 40 years to unwind the alarmist beliefs/momentum and move on. A hard EU winter should suffice there given the natgas shortage imposed by Russia. A failed California grid should suffice there. A hard NE winter should suffice there. Heck, Switzerland is proposing to ban EV’s this winter to keep the lights on.
One can pretend to ignore reality until it bites hard. The attempt to spin the Feb 2021 ERCOT failure after the fact is an early example of trying to ignore reality. Feb 2021 did not bite quite hard enough in Texas.

Nick Stokes
December 12, 2022 2:57 pm

Eric,
This isn’t the only note of caution we’ve seen lately. “

You didn’t highlight this bit from the quote:
Climate models project an increase in the proportion of high-intensity storms, with stronger winds and higher rainfall, according to the Earth Systems and Climate Change Hub.

University of Melbourne expert Professor Kevin Walsh agrees with the modelling.

It isn’t a new prediction; it says what the IPCC reports, at least since AR3, have been saying. Probably fewer cyclones, but the fraction of high intensity storms may increase.

Rud Istvan
Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 12, 2022 3:23 pm

‘Probably fewer but maybe worse’ is just parseltongue for ‘we haven’t a clue but are very worried’.
Or, to be more technically precise, it has been shown in several peer reviewed papers that global climate models do NOT regionally downscale using either of the two accepted downscaling methodologies. Australia specific future cyclone predictions are classic regional downscaling. For footnote references, see essay ‘Last Cup of Coffee’ in ebook Blowing Smoke.

Nick Stokes
Reply to  Rud Istvan
December 12, 2022 3:43 pm

Rud,
The headline says
“Have Embarrassing Failed Predictions Taught Climate Scientists to be Cautious?”
which it follows up with someone currently being cautious. But on this topic, scientists have always been cautious, for the reasons you indicate.

bnice2000
Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 12, 2022 5:31 pm

Failed prediction haven’t hindered any of the most squawking of self-styled “climate scientists”

They just get promotions and squawk louder.

robaustin
Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 12, 2022 6:29 pm

Nick,
Certain scientists of a certain persuasion seem to default to the “cautious” prediction of alarming news. Few seem to have the gumption and humility to admit that they just don’t know. Professor Walsh “agrees with the modelling”.
Is Walsh agreeing with the modelling because he has independent confirmation or because he likes the tenor of the projections?

Nick Stokes
Reply to  robaustin
December 12, 2022 7:02 pm

You could ask Eric. He chose to feature this report.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  robaustin
December 13, 2022 6:08 am

“Is Walsh agreeing with the modelling because he has independent confirmation or because he likes the tenor of the projections?”

Nope. No independent varification of anything.

Walsh is agreeing with the models because they are the only thing he has with which to agree. Walsh is saying, “I agree with these guesses”. Meaningless. Especially when the guesses/models don’t agree with reality.

MarkW
Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 12, 2022 8:24 pm

Scientists have always been cautious, as you say.
All the more evidence that climate scientists aren’t scientists.

Mike
Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 12, 2022 8:30 pm

” But on this topic, scientists have always been cautious,”

You would be funny if you weren’t so damn hard boiled.

CSIRO chief……(A physicist BTW)
” Climate change started as an environmental ”emergency” then an economic ”emergency” now a health ”emergency”.
Please see below for other ”scientific” gems from this ”scientist”

https://www.facebook.com/abcnews.au/videos/csiro-chief-dr-larry-marshall-on-the-state-of-climate-change-and-megatrends/3355032001450365/

Last edited 1 month ago by Mike
Tony_G
Reply to  Mike
December 13, 2022 11:43 am

When Einstein predicted the visual displacement of stars behind the sun due to gravity bending the light, did he say it “may” happen?

Mike
Reply to  Rud Istvan
December 12, 2022 5:42 pm

 just parseltongue for ‘we haven’t a clue but are very worried’.

This isn’t said anywhere near enough.
Pretty obvious 97% of climate scientists don’t have a clue 97% of the time.

Last edited 1 month ago by Mike
Mr.
Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 12, 2022 3:30 pm

But this article is about the legions of failed predictions & projections Nick.

Not whether one more doomster joins the ranks of rank failed weather prophets.

Last edited 1 month ago by Mr.
Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 12, 2022 4:29 pm

Of course he agrees with the modeling, no matter how wrong it is. He’s more concerned about his job than ethics.

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 12, 2022 5:00 pm

may increase? Oh, how dreadful!

bnice2000
Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 12, 2022 5:30 pm

“Probably fewer cyclones, but the fraction of high intensity storms may increase.”

Pure crystal balls gazing… meaningless.

But if you have LESS number of cyclones overall and a slightly less reduction in high intensity cyclones…

.. even a remedial maths student, like you, would eventually figure out that the fraction of high intensity would increase.

Pat Frank
Reply to  bnice2000
December 12, 2022 6:46 pm

Good point, bnice. If there are fewer cyclones overall and a larger fraction is intense, then the absolute number of intense cyclones may decrease.

Their wording is misdirection by portentous vaguery.

MarkW
Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 12, 2022 8:24 pm

The models have been predicting an increase in high-intensity storms for over 30 years.
Much like the predictions of accelerating sea level rise, or accelerating temperatures, these predictions have all failed.

Alan Millar
Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 13, 2022 5:51 am

Or may decrease or may stay the same.

Can I get a job in climate science, as my prediction will turn out to be true in any timescale?

MarkH
December 12, 2022 3:02 pm

It has made them more censorious. But, perhaps their clamoring to shut down debate is starting to open the eyes of some of the masses of people who aren’t paying attention. We are on the verge of a new Lysenkoism, governments and legacy media are falling over themselves to censor anything that does not conform to the “settled science”.

The COVID fiasco is, largely, a facsimile of the Climate Change scenario, just on a much more accelerated timeline. The speed at which it unfolded has allowed many more people to see even a glimpse of what is going on. The pushing of “settled science” that was clearly wrong, the censorship and defamation of real scientists asking important questions, the use of very sketchy computer models to justify the actions, and post hoc claim the benefit of those actions (the “lives saved” by the one and only approved therapy were determined by subtracting the actual deaths from the modelled deaths, even though the model was so wildly inaccurate that it was a joke).

The fate of the modern world seems to hang in the balance. Highly organized forces are conspiring (yep, they have meetings) to control the world through a technocratic authoritarian global regime. They have glossy brochures and tout their interests in “Tolerance” and “Equity” (<– There’s a BIG tell) and “Sustainability”. Scratch the surface and you find the Marxist underpinnings of all of this. Now, the ones truly in charge (the Inner Party if you will) do not actually believe in Marxism, in a communist utopia that will emerge after the evil Capitalists have been vanquished. They are interested only in power. As Orwell noted, power for power’s sake. They have no end goal, no purpose for which they want to take power, they just want the power, to do that, they are willing to destroy the entire world. The degree to which the world currently resembles that of 1984 is disturbing. It seems that they no longer assign that novel as a text in high schools, that is a major error (though, something done intentionally isn’t generally considered an error).

abolition man
Reply to  MarkH
December 12, 2022 11:23 pm

MarkH,
1984 with a hint of the Matrix thrown in thanks to social media!

Tom Abbott
Reply to  MarkH
December 13, 2022 6:22 am

The thinking of the radical Democrats is definitely “1984”. The radical Democrat cabal currently trying to undermine the United States constitution would love to have the control “Big Brother” has in the novel. And that’s their goal.

Joseph Zorzin
December 12, 2022 4:49 pm

“It is difficult to predict whether changes in cyclone formation and behavior will pose a risk to Australia, according to Walsh.”

Good- then time to move on to strongly predictable problems- like a shortage of needed energy.

John Hultquist
December 12, 2022 5:16 pm

I can’t say the exact date but 2023 will be the year of “the Rapture.”
I might be mixing this up with an August Blue Moon or a Taurids Meteor
Shower in November, or a Tribbles shower on The Beach island of Ko Phi Phi Le.
This prediction stuff is hard.
I’ll see myself to the door.

Peta of Newark
December 12, 2022 7:45 pm

Nice picture of Kevin sitting there, completely vacant and drunk, in a pub.

So nicely captures this entire thing – the effects of eating a high carb diet for year after year are exactly the same as drinking alcohol over an extended time.

Both completely trash our brains, minds and entire nervous systems. Sugar and booze, either alone or in combination, create Zombies

Just what we see in the picture. Brain-dead, belligerent, buck-passing, mendacious, selfish, lazy and unthinking zombies.
i.e. Folks who engage in ‘Unreasonable behaviour‘ – just ask, what is now the majority of adult women = the ones who have asked for and gotten divorced.

They’ll tell you all about it and is why they number so few in The Climate Debate.
They’ve spent a lifetime having exactly similar arguements and they know that there is No Way they can ever win them.

SteveG
December 13, 2022 12:08 am

I had a squiz at the bio of Dr Claire Michelle Stephens, currently benefitting from various taxpayer funded research grants at the UNSW.

> PhD in Civil/Environmental Engineering University of New South Wales (with research exchange at Columbia University NY), 2020
> Chartered Professional Engineer and Member, Institute of Engineers Australia
> Bachelor of Engineering (Environmental) (Hons I) University of Queensland (with exchange at Technische Universität Berlin, Germany), 2011

She appears to be very intelligent, with great qualifications. See this is the type of person that should be using her brain power in the fossil fuel industry, such as helping design and engineer, let’s say an African nation’s fossil fuel infrastructure, that can make a tangible difference to real people’s standard of living, in the real world.

Instead, Claire has decided to use that brainpower, sitting in a university office, playing computer games.

CampsieFellow
December 13, 2022 2:26 am

They’re not daft. Look at her words carefully. “won’t necessarily”. “I didn’t say they wouldn’t, so there.” If, could, might, chance, etc, etc, etc. But the media ignores the caveats. Maybe they are supposed to.

garboard
December 13, 2022 3:54 am

unfortunately it’s not about the science it’s about the media . while the scientific data continues to weaken the cash going into alarmist media has increased exponentially. organizations like covering climate now and climate central feed news to the simple minded networks and print media while the tsunami of you tube climate propagandists receive billions more from the likes of gates , schmidt , rockefeller and philanthropies with murky motives . organizations like AP and PBS are given millions to hire “ climate journalists “ . sceptics need to match that kind of money to level the playing field .

Dan Hughes
December 13, 2022 4:36 am

It is not possible for GCMs to project any events that it cannot spatially or temporally resolve.

And that includes just about all events of interest.

Tom Abbott
December 13, 2022 4:54 am

From the article: “Tropical cyclones in Australia: How severe are they, and what impact will climate change have on them?”

What [Human-caused] climate change?

There’s no evidence for Human-caused Climate Change due to CO2. Assuming it exists without evidence of such, is not logical or scientific.

Last edited 1 month ago by Tom Abbott
Tom Abbott
December 13, 2022 5:00 am

From the article: “This isn’t the only note of caution we’ve seen lately. Who can forget Professor Pitman’s disclosure that climate science cannot [tell] us whether droughts will become more or less likely? Though Pitman later qualified his statement “there is no link between climate change and drought”, claiming what he meant to say was “there is no direct link between climate change and drought”.”

A distinction without a difference.

Last edited 1 month ago by Tom Abbott
Bruce Cobb
December 13, 2022 5:30 am

It hardly matters any more what so-called “climate scientists” say.They will always use just enough waffle words to keep the CAGW scam, which their paychecks depend on, rolling along. Besides, they know that the MSM is doing the heavy hitting for them with their “extreme weather” messaging. Isn’t that convenient? They get to soft peddle the climate alarm, making them appear “sciency”. It’s a win-win for them.

Energywise
December 13, 2022 10:47 am

They chase grants by producing flawed models that give the outcomes the grant providers want

They are not scientists, they are simply professionally inept and self serving and they do science a great dis-service in their race to the bottom, with their pieces of silver

sherro01
December 13, 2022 4:02 pm

Why look to predictions (that are, essentially, subjective guesses) to be cautious? Why not look at past data, which are less subjective?
Geoff S
http://www.geoffstuff.com/uahdec2022.jpg

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights