Climate Change Science

[Aractus]

I find it interesting that your chart showing a mean of the major temperature records shows no increase for the period in question yet each of the temperature records shows an increase.

And I find it interesting that you go straight to graphs instead of straight to the climate scientists.

Cause and Effect, by Scott Denning - 02/Mar/2014:

• A very common misconception about climate change is that projections of future warming are based on extrapolation of recent warming trends. This misconception is fed by media reporting: both “fourth warmest January on record” and “global warming pause” narratives suggest that we’re waiting with bated breath to see what the climate will do, and whether emerging trends can be understood. Even well-intentioned science outreach often starts off with a graph showing rising temperatures as if this is the basis for our understanding and prediction.
  
  But our expectations of future warming are not based on extrapolation of recent trends. Rather, we expect climate to be warmer in the future than in the past because we know that greenhouse gases absorb and then re-emit thermal radiation. As people around the world burn more and more fossil fuels, concentrations of greenhouse gases increase, so that solar energy accumulates under the extra absorbing gas. Scientists expect accumulating heat to cause warming temperatures because we know that when we add heat to things, they change their temperatures.

His explanation is that global warming projections are based on science rather than on observation. This is an admission that the science doesn't agree with observations.

• Roy Spencer:
  

Part of the problem is we're told the models are reliable because they can reproduce the 20th century trend in climate. However, models that are just 7 years old couldn't even forecast accurately the last few years. If they were actually reliable they would been able to forecast the past 100 years plus the future 7! If 2007 models couldn't paint an accurate picture through to 2013, why should we believe they can paint an accurate picture through to 2100? The fact is that no matter how accurate their modelling of the past is, they are not reliable if they can't accurately model the future. The excuses that climate scientists are coming up with are a complete cop-out, this idea that "it's just a blip". Just a blip? In 86 out of 90 climate models?

The IPCC predictions have failed.