Following several brief comments about another AGW scientist owning up to the weakness of the computer models, is a site that lists failed AGW climate computer models projections. Remember it is these computer projection upon which rests the entire rationale for the manmade global warming theory,
Kevin Trenberth is “Distinguished Senior Scientist in the Climate Analysis Section of the National Center for Atmospheric Research”. Trenberth has been a lead author for IPCC Global Warming Reports. He is also one of the Climategate gang. In one of the hacked emails he sent to his compatriots he said: “The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment, and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.” (My emphasis) He later explained that what he really meant is that the globe is still heating up but nobody can figure out where the heat is going. Recently Dr Spencer and Dr Braswell seem to have explained this. See here for their paper On the Misdiagnosis of Climate Feedbacks from Variations in Earth’s Radiant Energy Balance Roy W. Spencer, and William D. Braswell.
So we are talking about a major leader in the AGW theory crowd. He recently has published a paper in “Climate Research”. In that paper according to CO2 Science:
…..(he) compares the projections of state-of-the-art climate models with what is known about the real world with respect to extreme meteorological events related to atmospheric moisture, such as precipitation and various types of storm systems, as well as subsequent extreme consequences such as droughts, floods and wind damage. So what does he find?
The C3 blog summarizes that paper as follows:
Specifically, Trenberth takes issue with the climate models’ inadequacies in regards to precipitation. Such as:
“…all models contain large errors in precipitation simulations, both in terms of mean fields and their annual cycle, as well as their characteristics: the intensity, frequency, and duration of precipitation…”
“…relates to poor depiction of transient tropical disturbances, including easterly waves, Madden-Julian Oscillations, tropical storms, and hurricanes…”
“…confidence in model results for changes in extremes is tempered by the large scatter among the extremes in modeling today’s climate, especially in the tropics and subtropics…”
“…it appears that many, perhaps all, global climate and numerical weather prediction models and even many high-resolution regional models have a premature onset of convection and overly frequent precipitation with insufficient intensity,…”
“…model-simulated precipitation “occurs prematurely and too often, and with insufficient intensity, resulting in recycling that is too large…”
“…a lifetime of moisture in the atmosphere that is too short, which affects runoff and soil moisture…”
and finally, he has a NSS moment…”major challenges remain to improve model simulations of the hydrological cycle.”
Ok we skeptic were pretty sure that was the case. But remember that group still wants us to bet the future on their models.
I want to lead you to a treasure trove of AGW computer model “Fails”. If you click HERE you will get a listing of computer models failures.
Here are some of the recent titles:
NASA Research Reveals Antarctica Ice Sheet Melt Just A Fraction of Climate Model Predictions
New Research: Experts Determine German Flooding Has Not Increased From Global Warming As Predicted
IPCC Prediction That Global Warming Would Cause More Wildfires Proves To Be Wrong
Since 1990, IPCC’s Climate Predictions Have Been Wrong – Billions Wasted On Worthless Fortunetelling
Hansen’s Global Climate Model In Total Fail: Predicted Ocean Heat Goes Missing
Look at the other links that take you to more good information.
cbdakota
Climate Change Sanity 