UK Paper Attacked By Government For Showing Global Warming Predictions A Huge Miscalculation

March 31, 2013 1:16 pmViews: 1487

Global Warming predictions are a huge miscalculation

Global warming proponents don't do well when their supposedly "settled science" is shown to have serious flaws. It is usually government agencies that have an agenda who are the big proponents of global warming or now more politically referred to as "climate change" since their predictions have started to fall apart.

Everything these days seems to be politically motivated and when the UK paper The Daily Mail published an article and a graph (pictured above) showing there has been no statistically significant increase in global temperatures for more than 16 years the watchdog group that advises the UK Government on greenhouse gas emissions attacked British newspaper. So why aren't proponents of global warming climate change interested in the truth? Well, there's the truth and then there is everyone's agenda and if those two things conflict, the truth gets suppressed.

The case in point is the chart above which shows predicted global temperature models vs actual temperatures. The chart shows scientist's predictions from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as a 95 percent accuracy were actually wrong and global temperatures have not risen as expected or shall we say, as wanted. In looking at the graph and the vertical  gray line around 2005 that is where the real predictions began going forward and anything before that line is just back tested data to build the computer model. However, once the model goes into effect around 2005 and tries to predict worldwide temperatures, it fails almost immediately. When the UK Daily Mail published their findings, that is when they were attacked. Apparently, truth matters very little, even in the UK.

Read more on this story below from The Daily Mail:

The official watchdog that advises the Government on greenhouse gas emissions targets has launched an astonishing attack on The Mail on Sunday – for accurately reporting that alarming predictions of global warming are wrong.

We disclosed that although highly influential computer models are still estimating huge rises in world temperatures, there has been no statistically significant increase for more than 16 years.

Despite our revelation earlier this month, backed up by a scientifically researched graph, the Committee on Climate Change still clings to flawed predictions.

Leading the attack is committee member Sir Brian Hoskins, who is also director of the Grantham Institute for Climate Change at Imperial College, London. In a blog on the Committee on Climate Change’s website, Sir Brian insisted: ‘The scientific basis for significant long-term climate risks remains robust, despite the points raised .  .  . Early and deep cuts in emissions are still required.’

He also claimed our report ‘misunderstood’ the value of computer models. Yet in an interview three years ago, Sir Brian conceded that when he started out as a climate scientist, the models were ‘pretty lousy, and they’re still pretty lousy, really’.

Our graph earlier this month was reproduced from a version first drawn by Dr Ed Hawkins, of the National Centre for Atmospheric Science. Last week it was reprinted as part of a four-page report in The Economist.

The accuracy of computer forecasts is vital because they influence politicians and their key environmental advisers on how urgently to act on climate change – and how many billions of pounds they take from the taxpayer in ‘green’ levies.

Related Posts For You: