Researchers now claim global warming predictions are greatly exaggerated. (This is not surprising to those of us climate change skeptics.)
What is shocking is that the findings were published in a peer-reviewed journal and are now actually being covered by some media. The UK Daily Mail has a review of the study:
Since 1990, scientists have used complex models to predict how climate change and manmade greenhouse emissions will affect the world.
But a team of experts – including an astrophysicist, statistician, and geography professor – has claimed these models ‘very greatly exaggerate’ the effects of global warming.
Using a simpler, solar-based model, the researchers arrived at figures that are more than half those previously predicted.
The paper, ‘Why models run hot: results from an irreducibly simple climate model’, was written by Lord Christopher Monckton of Brenchley, astrophysicist and geoscientist Willie Soon, Professor of Geography at the University of Delaware David Legates, and statistician Dr Matt Briggs.
It has been peer reviewed and is published in the journal Science Bulletin.
Interestingly, one of the scientists who authored the paper has a connection to Cornell. Dr. Matt Briggs, who has a Ph.D. in mathematical statistics from that university, has been the focus of a lot of heat from global warming advocates. He explained the smear campaign to Stephen K. Bannon on Breitbart News Sunday.
Chairman Bannon asked Briggs how he reacts to all the “smug” entertainers, celebrities, personalities, and others who assert that global warming is a settled science. Briggs responded by explaining that what is settled, “is the fundamental, unshakable scientific principle, that if you have a theory that makes bad predictions, that theory must be wrong. And we have had lousy predictions from these climate models for years and years and years. Something must be wrong. This is undeniable.”
Briggs elaborated that his paper has been downloaded 10,000 times, making it one of the most downloaded reports on climate change ever. But the statistician acknowledged that a lot of money and careers are on the line, largely relying on the premise that the planet is heating up.
Consequently, he said, reporters from the aforementioned media outlets have done their best to smear the authors’ names. Moreover, they made attempts to get Soon and Legates fired from their jobs. Accusations were made that the authors wrote the paper for financial gains. Yet, no money was ever given or received for writing it. Briggs said the reporters “did not want to believe the truth I was telling them.”
Studies such as this one often do not get funded; or, when they manage to find the money, the peer journals refuse to approve data that doesn’t agree with the current “consensus.”
Paired with this story is the news that the NASA climate scientists who claimed 2014 set a new record for global warmth admitted they were only 38 per cent sure this was true.
GISS’s director Gavin Schmidt has now admitted Nasa thinks the likelihood that 2014 was the warmest year since 1880 is just 38 per cent. However, when asked by this newspaper whether he regretted that the news release did not mention this, he did not respond.
If this isn’t enough to get you hot under the collar, just wait—there’s even steamier news breaking from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Its head has now resigned over sexual harassment charges.
Rajendra Pachauri, the head of the United Nations’ body that’s tasked with studying climate change and its supposed effects, resigned from his post Tuesday amid charges that he sexually harassed one of his employees.
The Guardian reported that Mr. Pachauri has denied the charges made by a 29-year-old woman who works at his research institute in Delhi, India.
But he also said the charges would interfere in his work for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and has therefore stepped down, The Hill reported.
“The IPCC needs strong leadership and dedication of time and full attention by the chair in the immediate future, which under the current circumstance I am unable to provide,” he said in a resignation letter to U.S. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.
Yes, I suppose promoting bad science to force substantial modification in human behaviors and global markets would be a full time job! In fact, they are so busy touting their version of climate change that the United Nations currently has no plans to investigate the allegations.
Bonus! The Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon is proceeding full-steam to achieve “universal agreement on climate change”, deeply flawed models notwithstanding.DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.