Yet another global warming prediction falls flat on its face

October 9, 2016
The Goracle hates failure!

The Goracle will melt the ice himself!

One of the reasons (1) I’ve been so skeptical over the years regarding the theory of catastrophic man-caused global warming (2) is that, to date, not a single one of its apologists’ predictions have come true. None. Zip. Zero. Nada. Not the tropospheric hot spot, not the frequency of storms (that was later changed to “storm intensity” when they failed to appear on schedule), not snow-less winters… It goes on and on.

Now we have another one.

For years, climate cultists up to and including Al Gore himself have claimed that global warming would lead to the disappearance of Arctic ice, with, of course disastrous and DOOM!!! for us all. This, in spite of there being less ice in the Arctic 6,000-7,000 years ago (3), when we supposedly lived in a climatic golden age.

Guess what? They’re wrong again:

“Dire predictions that the Arctic would be devoid of sea ice by September this year have proven to be unfounded after latest satellite images showed there is far more now than in 2012.

Scientists such as Prof Peter Wadhams, of Cambridge University, and Prof Wieslaw Maslowski, of the Naval Postgraduate School in Moderey, California, have regularly forecast the loss of ice by 2016, which has been widely reported by the BBC and other media outlets.

Prof Wadhams, a leading expert on Arctic sea ice loss, has recently published a book entitled A Farewell To Ice in which he repeats the assertion that the polar region would free of ice in the middle of this decade.
As late as this summer, he was still predicting an ice-free September.

Yet, when figures were released for the yearly minimum on September 10, they showed that there was still 1.6 million square miles of sea ice (4.14 square kilometres), which was 21 per cent more than the lowest point in 2012.

Ooops. smiley I dont know

Real science is kept accountable through reproducibility and verification by experiment. Shouldn’t the climate change cult be held to the same standards, and shouldn’t the failure of any of their models to accurately predict the future (let alone model the past) be held against them?

I must hate the Earth, or something.

via Jeff Jacoby

Footnotes:
(1) Aside from bad science, corruption, and a misanthropic religious fervor…
(2) Later changed for marketing reasons to “climate change” when the world failed to warm as predicted…
(3) And yet the polar bears seemed to do just fine. It’s as animals can adapt. Weird.


The abject failure of official global-warming predictions

January 13, 2016

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) can’t get a single prediction about global warming right, and yet we’re supposed to take drastic, economically harmful action on their say so? Yeah, right.

Watts Up With That?

Guest essay by Monckton of Brenchley

The IPCC published its First Assessment Report a quarter of a century ago, in 1990. The Second Assessment Report came out 20 years ago, the Third 15 years ago. Even 15 years is enough to test whether the models’ predictions have proven prophetic. In 2008, NOAA’s report on the State of the Global Climate, published as a supplement to the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, said: “The simulations rule out (at the 95% level) zero trends for intervals of 15 yr or more, suggesting that an observed absence of warming of this duration is needed to create a discrepancy with the expected present-day warming rate.”

To the continuing embarrassment of the profiteers of doom, the least-squares linear-regression trends on Dr Roy Spencer’s UAH satellite dataset shows no global warming at all for 18 years 6 months, despite a continuing (and gently accelerating) increase…

View original post 1,336 more words


I bought beachfront property in the Sierras for nothing

February 23, 2010

In the latest of a series of predictions that haven’t worked out and sloppy science exposed, it now turns out that President Obama won’t have to heal the planet after all… because the seas aren’t rising:

Scientists have been forced to withdraw a study on projected sea level rise due to global warming after finding mistakes that undermined the findings.

The study, published in 2009 in Nature Geoscience, one of the top journals in its field, confirmed the conclusions of the 2007 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). It used data over the last 22,000 years to predict that sea level would rise by between 7cm and 82cm by the end of the century.

At the time, Mark Siddall, from the Earth Sciences Department at the University of Bristol, said the study “strengthens the confidence with which one may interpret the IPCC results“. The IPCC said that sea level would probably rise by 18cm-59cm by 2100, though stressed this was based on incomplete information about ice sheet melting and that the true rise could be higher.

Many scientists criticised the IPCC approach as too conservative, and several papers since have suggested that sea level could rise more. Martin Vermeer of the Helsinki University of Technology, Finland and Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany published a study in December that projected a rise of 0.75m to 1.9m by 2100.

Siddall said that he did not know whether the retracted paper’s estimate of sea level rise was an overestimate or an underestimate.

In other words, “We don’t know what went wrong, just that the previous work was total bollocks.”

RELATED: In the wake of Climategate revelations at the UAE’s Climatic Research Unit, the IPCC, and now NASA, Senator James Inhofe (R-OK), is calling on the Department of Justice to open an investigation. While I think it would be far more warranted than their witch-hunt against Bush Administration lawyers and CIA interrogators, I somehow doubt the DOJ under President Obama and his Attorney General will jump on this.

ASIDE: Note that the link to the quoted story is to the UK’s Guardian newspaper, which leans hard to the Left. This is yet another example of how the European, Australian, and Indian press, even those favorable toward climate alarmism, are doing a far better job covering the growing scandals than the mainstream American press, which itself is maintaining a deafening silence. It’s nothing short of ethical corruption and journalistic malpractice.

(via Fausta)

UPDATE: According to Senator Bernie Sanders (Independent Socialist-Vermont), AGW skeptics are no better than Nazis. Is that the same as being a traitor to the planet? And do I get a cool uniform?