IPCC models rooted in assumptions that we humans can and do control the Atlantic Ocean’s circulation with our daily-activity CO2 emissions have been wrong since the mid-1980s. Why should we still believe in them?
The latest IPCC report continues to say it is “very likely” the Atlantic Meridional Ocean Circulation (AMOC), a fundamental climate parameter, will weaken (and unleash cooling, catastrophic storms, drought, floods) in the 21st century.
But, as the authors of a new study note, since the mid-1980s the 84 (CMIP5) and 56 (CMIP6) AMOC models have been contradicted by observations in both magnitude and sign. The AMOC has not been declining in response to increases in atmospheric CO2. There is even evidence of trend increases.
“[W]e find that neither the CMIP5 nor the CMIP6 ensemble mean are successful at representing the observational AMOC data. … We show that both the magnitude of the trend in the AMOC over different time periods and often even the sign of the trend differs between observations and climate model ensemble mean, with the magnitude of the trend difference becoming even greater when looking at the CMIP6 ensemble compared to CMIP5.”
So, as the scientists ask, why should we trust future modeled predictions?
“[I]f these models cannot reproduce past variations, why should we be so confident about their ability to predict the future?”
___________________________________________________________________
For the same reason that Charlie Brown believes in the Great Pumpkin.
Linus believes in the Great Pumpkin. Charlie Brown gets suckered into (not) kicking a football. Both of them are as foolish as climate modelers.
Childish beliefs or naivety are to be expected in children; unquestioned beliefs lacking in scientific facts or data are reprehensible in supposedly well-educated adults!
Thanks for the correction.
Belief has its limitations
I saw the new caravan of thousands of illegal immigrants heading towards the U.S. southern border this morning chanting: “Biden!, Biden!, Biden!.
I think that film clip will make a good campaign add for the Republicans. It highlights who the real problem is when it comes to the wide-open southern border. It’s: Biden!, Biden!, Biden!.
I’m sure that all the regular readers of this blog are shocked by – NOT.
– shocked by this finding –
miss the edit function.
The question is: Why aren’t climate alarmists breathing a sigh of relief because their models are wrong? There is no climate crisis connected with CO2, according to actual observations. They should feel relief, and be spreading the good news near and far.
We all know that the real goal is not to alleviate a climate crisis–it is to get rid of fossil fuels and modern technology. They are really horrified that people recognize that there is no climate crisis so they are just doubling down.
I always wondered how, if the planet became so warm as to somehow instantly melt the Greenland Ice Sheet, which is about what it would take to shut down the Gulf Stream, then where would this cold air come from to initiate another Younger Dryas? Wouldn’t it be tropical everywhere by then?
The Beaufort Gyre dumping its fresh water into the North Atlantic might shut the AMOC down, but they don’t know when that might happen although they expect sometime in the next hundred years or so.
The IPCC models failure to have predicted correctly past events is shirley a condemnation of those models. This reminds me of a Professor of Physics (I think from Kansas?) who described the process of “premature scientific discovery”, wherein existing data is assembled into a prediction, then experiments designed and undertaken to provide the truth, which experiments indicate the prediction was indeed a discovery. Us geologists, either of the yellow or black gold type, regularly assemble data and observations into predictions of a body of tremendous value just below and just waiting to be drilled, then drilling (the experiment part!) and discovering a big gold deposit or oil reservoir. The premature scientific discovery requires good data and models (and skill level of the prognosticator), which are, as noted in the report above, lacking at IPCC. One obvious reason for this failure is the blending of political themes into valid data, producing a failure that even tuned models cannot overcome.
Yes it is a condemnation of those models. And stop calling me Shirley.
sorry
Had to be said.
I think the big problem with the IPCC is they are finding what they what to find, not what is actually there.
The whole official focus of the IPCC is to find human-caused climate change and so they claim they have found it.
If they couldn’t find human-caused climate change, they would be out of a job. So they distort the truth and say they have found what they are looking for and have fulfilled the purpose of the IPCC.
They do this having not a shred of evidence that CO2 is doing what they claim it is doing in the Earth’s atmosphere, such as claiming CO2 is making the weather more extreme (the weather is not more extreme). All they have is speculation, assumptions and assertions. Nothing more.
The system is mathematically chaotic, how could anyone expect to do a successful long-range forward or hindcast prediction?
Bingo:
IPCC TAR Chapter 14 Page 771 (pdf pg. 3)
The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system,
and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states
is not possible.
It goes on to say “Rather the focus must be upon the prediction
of the probability distribution of the system’s future possible
states by the generation of ensembles of model solutions.”
Absolute balderdash, any such venture would be pointless. If the system is chaotic then running lots of scenarious that are all wrong will just lead to toally fallacious pseudo-probability distributions.
I’m sure it got them plenty of funding though.
Word salad with extra Green Goddess dressing, of course!
Correction of IPCC statement:
Rather the focus must be upon
the prediction of the probability distribution . . . .how to adapt to the various weather conditions as this will cost a small fraction of the futile endeavor to engineer 30 perfect climates for each climate zone or subzone.
“The problem is that we don’t know how close to reality a model needs to be to make good predictions. “
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/oct/02/the-big-idea-can-we-predict-the-climate-of-the-future
I would have thought a model would need to be as close to how a system actually works as is possible to be considered, no? And nobody truly understands how it all works, despite the laughable claims in the MSM that the science is settled. That way, my friend, lies rigid religious dogma. All hail the high priests….
“Earth Has a 27.5-Million-Year ‘Heartbeat’, But We Have No Idea What Causes It
This pulse of clustered geological events – including volcanic activity, mass extinctions, plate reorganizations, and sea level rises – is incredibly slow, a 27.5-million-year cycle of catastrophic ebbs and flows.”
…
“These events include times of marine and non-marine extinctions, major ocean-anoxic events, continental flood-basalt eruptions, sea-level fluctuations, global pulses of intraplate magmatism, and times of changes in seafloor-spreading rates and plate reorganizations”
https://www.sciencealert.com/earth-has-a-27-5-million-year-heartbeat-but-we-have-no-idea-what-causes-it
There’s another parameter….
“The latest IPCC report continues to say it is “very likely” the Atlantic Meridional Ocean Circulation (AMOC), a fundamental climate parameter, will weaken”
Now I am confused.
“Today, in a research article published in the same journal Science, my colleagues and I have provided what we consider to be the most definitive evidence yet that the AMO doesn’t actually exist.”
https://michaelmann.net/content/rise-and-fall-atlantic-multidecadal-oscillation
Strat,
Atlantic Meridional Ocean Circulation (AMOC) is not the same as Atlantic Multi-decadal Oscillation (AMO). However, if the AMO exists, it influences strength of AMOC.
Thanks for clearing that up
RelPerm,
Are you actually giving Mickey Mann a scintilla of credence!? I had taken his doubts about AMO existence as a virtual proof! What in the last 25 or 30 years has he been correct about?
Good question.
Mickey ‘madeyes’ Mann has been trying his usual trick of ironing out things he disagrees with. He doesn’t like the AMO so has written a series of semi-literate unscientific papers attempting to write it off as poor science by the discoverers and the odd reading from volcanoes. Meanwhile he has tried to relabel the North Atlantic Current/Gulf Stream system as the AMOC in an attempt to overwrite the AMO. He’s an idiot, best to just ignore his incompetent blunderings around.
I believe Mann was the one who said even if temperatures cooled for a few decades, it would not mean the CO2-caused climate change narative is wrong.
So Mickey is going to believe in it no matter what the circumstances.
Hang on to that narrative for dear life, Mickey.
If it cools for a few decades, people will be throwing rocks at you, Mickey.
O/T
People’s Question Time at [London] City Hall last night.
Saddiq Khan’s main job is to temporize until Muslims can take over.
More accurate than a climate model…
Ignore all the failures of the prognostications….
The new colonialism
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/nov/10/australia-to-offer-residency-to-tuvalu-residents-displaced-by-climate-change
All these “ climate migrants” in the US strangely seem to include division size numbers of chi coms and people on the terrorist watch list. Many have been pulled up and then released , to go about their merry way in our country. Including some older but top ISIS commanders. Yea they are just climate migrants. God help us. And the useful idiots that know not what they do.
They do indeed know what they’re doing. And ICE, rather than honoring their oath, just follow orders.
And Tuvalu exhibits no evidence on imminent climate change disaster of any kind. This is about vote stacking.
And that’s AMOK that runs amok with the musing of would be predictors of the future. Then there is the ENSO which really takes the Mick out of them. Many claim to know what it is but no one anywhere knows what drives it. Until they do, just ignore.
Warm water rises, cold water sinks, and the earth rotates. No quantity of flapping butterfly wings changes that reality. Salinity in the water can affect it, but not eliminate the trend. Water at the equator moves along with the earth at around 1000 mph, and water at the poles is essentially still, at one revolution per day. No amount of butterfly wing flaps changes that, either. The momentum (m*v) and energy (1/2mv^2) of water at the equator are huge, and negligible at the poles, yet warm water still rises at the equator, and cold water still sinks at the poles. All this powers ocean circulation.
Global climate models gloss over these realities, and don’t even include them. Yet the Climate Cult Shamen want us to believe that fractional degree changes in temperatures will permanently destroy them. Their flapping gums have no more effect than a flapping butterfly wing.
From the Broadway version of Peter Pan; “If you believe in fairies, clap your hands!” That is the level of rationality incorporated throughout the Climastrology cult! Except, of course, for the leaders; who are just in it for the money!
It seems that climate alarmists do not even have an elementary understanding of Geography let alone of the variety of sciences needed to try and get a basic understanding of weather and climate. They are in fact green as in greenhorn (an inexperienced person, esp one who is extremely gullible Collins Dictionary)
Don’t forget we are moving thru space also.
https://youtu.be/fJuaPyQFrYk?si=U96jm88r5t0kskmf
And space is expanding. Which makes every moment in the Universe unique. Which makes the prediction of the future impossible as it never happened before.
The butterfly effect does not imply that chaotic systems are unpredictable. They in fact are predictable in the short term because of their deterministic character. But they become unpredictable after a certain amount of time, called the horizon of predictability. It’s the time required for tiny errors to double in size. For a chaotic electrical circuit, the horizon is something like a thousandth of a second. For the double pendulum, it’s a few tenths of a second. For the weather, it’s unknown but seems to be roughly a week or two, and for the entire solar system, it’s about 5 million years (as determined by very careful computer simulations).
–Professor Steven Strogatz–Cornell University
Well done! Simple facts, straight to the point!
Yesterday I wrote about McShane and Wyner´s rejoinder for the paleo-proxy discussion..You cannot pick a proxy and reconstruct a temperature series from it without a mathematical discussion how representative that data is (which is largely unknown and therefore the presented reconstructions in literature lack huge systematical uncertainties).
Likewise, R. McIntryre has shown that the attribution of climate models is fundamentally flawed (here I link to the Climate ETC article, which has a peer reviewed paper linked)
https://judithcurry.com/2021/08/18/the-ipccs-attribution-methodology-is-fundamentally-flawed/
So, even if these models would not change 25% for the CO2 climate sensitivity between generations and would look reasonably similar to the real world, for the real world, they mean exactly the same as scribbles of 4 year olds, maybe beautiful but of no scientific consequence! None whatsoever!
Both of these articles by themselves should end any climate discussion until their critique is resolved. That climate scientists publish anything without ever addressing this is just embarrassing for the editors and reviewers!
BTW, the article above is a nice data based answer to the claim by some alarmists that they have been warning for decades.. data shows that they warnings of the past were completely unjustified, as their database was (and is) simply not there!
It’s tough to make predictions, especially about the future.
— Yogi Berra
Climate models are a lot like socialism.
This time we’ll get it right.
Every damn one of the “predictions” issued by the doom mongering warmistas is full of things that may, might, could or possibly occur. Whyinhell are major energy policies made on the basis of maybe? Could there be another agenda perhaps?
Money / Control
Carl Wunsch says ocean models do not converge. Non-convergent models can’t provide anything meaningful (except about the model).
I was told they do “projections”, not “predictions”.
Wunsch says when he confronts modelers at meetings, he gets dismissed on the grounds that the models “look reasonable.” His words.
After much exposure, I’ve concluded that the best of the consensus climatologists are adepts of math and dilettantes of science.
We shouldn’t.
Models, lies and cheating the CAGW crowd is getting desperate. They know they are losing.
Lol!
You’re correct, but not in the way you’d like.
I would expect Mr. Stokes to weigh in on this study. Instead, the last nail can only laugh.
A desperate laugh reeking of stale fear!
There is no mathematical solution to predicting the future. No matter how many models you average.
The future is not written. Any more than the toss of a coin is written. It may be hotter, it may be cooler. It is a probability only.
Climate scientists that guess the correct future will be geniuses. Those that guess the wrong future will be forgotten.
Climate models are mere tools for us to see if we understand how the climate really works. To date they show we do not.