Global Warming: Scientific Consensus Proved Wrong

[Murky]

The world's climate experts have long been making some very dire predictions about Global Warming. Because they are predictions, they rely very heavily on computer models.

Many people-- especially conservatives-- warned about this. They pointed out that models are prone to many errors, and the scientific consensus is not always right.

Other people chose to rely on the scientific consensus. Honesty compels me to admit that I was in this group. We didn't think think the consensus was the last word, but we did believe it was the best window to the future a non-specialist could look through.

So this part really hurts me to write. But I have to.

The data testing key parts of the global warming consensus are now available.

Read the rest here.

 

[Ball Lightning]

Let me say a few things, those models where indeed off, but for the reason that they didn't include many of the factors which we now know about. From models that scientists used 10 years ago, we have gone above the highest level of CO2 output. And now we have much better computers, but they are not perfect.

Maybe models aren't good, but look around you, look at the facts and you will know that global warming is real. Now prove to me that it won't be bad.

 

[Mr. Blonde]

Nice find!

So, arctic ice melting is FAR worse than predicted by scientific models. Seems to me conservatives were right when doubting the models, well, the deviation is just on the wrong side of what was expected by them. Well, it seems polar bears won´t have a habitat in the near future.

 

[Verbose]

Ball Lightning: You should look at the link.

 

[Ball Lightning]

Ball Lightning: You should look at the link.

I only read whats here so i thought it was a no global warming thing, my fault. My dad has been doing some research with CSIRO into this and its not just the rapid ice melt, but the CO2 levels are going faster and higher then anyone predicted.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Bah! I fell for it

Looking at the graph I wanted to shout "Look at the graph man!" Then I read on and felt like an idiot

 

[Ball Lightning]

Lol, theres alot of unscientific websites trying to twist the truth to say that GW isn't real, and i thought this was another one. But thank god it isn't.

Great find.

 

[bigfatron]

Read the rest here.

Sadly I can't - "Error 403: access denied"

 

[Murky]

Sadly I can't - "Error 403: access denied"

It got picked up by the news feed sites so the website is probably not able to handle all the request. The sites defenses will probably see it as a denial of service attack and shut-down access temporarily.

The gist of the article is that Global Warming and it's effects are going to be much worse than the scientific consensus predicted.

 

[amadeus]

How come the only change is really after 2000?

 

[warpus]

How come the only change is really after 2000?

That's when Bush was elected, of course.

 

[El_Machinae]

How come the only change is really after 2000?

It's a velocity function subjected to an acceleration-style stimulus. So it will have inflection points.

 

[Masquerouge]

Nice one Murky I fell for it
Then I read this:

The above graph compares predictions made by the IPCC (pretty much the consensus) to reality (black line).

You can see the predictions don't match reality very well.

The reality is much, MUCH worse than the scientific consensus predicted. The arctic ice cap is melting decades faster than expected. DECADES.

The "skeptics" implied there are only two possibilities: either the scientific consensus is right, or global warming is not as bad as the scientists think.

Nature had other ideas, as She often does. In this critical area, global warming is happening far faster, and with far more severity, than most scientists had predicted.

 

[Murky]

How come the only change is really after 2000?

Purely coincidentle.

 

[skadistic]

Thats great the Arctic has lost ice. Any one have a fancy graph that shows the Antarctic and if its lost or gained ice? We do have 2 polar ice caps.

 

[El_Machinae]

Thats great the Arctic has lost ice. Any one have a fancy graph that shows the Antarctic and if its lost or gained ice? We do have 2 polar ice caps.

The Antarctic will both lose and gain ice.

It will gain ice everywhere the average temperature is less that 32F, because any water falling on that area will freeze into ice.

Of course, it loses ice whereever the average temperature is greater than 32F.

So, don't be fooled by reports that some places in the Antarctic are gaining ice because any precipitation falling into a below-zero region will (of course) freeze.

But the circle of 'below 32F average' around the Antarctic is shrinking. Additionally, the warmer water is sending more precipitation into that region.

So the ice loss is referring to the portions that are near freezing, and thus are very susceptible to any warming. You won't see any melting for a region that goes from -10F to -8F, but you will see melting in a region that goes from 31F to 33F.

 

[Merkinball]

Oh man, half the ice sheet is gone. You'd think that'd result in higher sea levels and a drowning Bangladesh of something. Someone get Al Gore his Nobel Peace prize!

 

[Perfection]

Oh man, half the ice sheet is gone. You'd think that'd result in higher sea levels and a drowning Bangladesh of something. Someone get Al Gore his Nobel Peace prize!

Dude, sheets over water float. When they melt they take up the space they were floating on with little change in sea level.

What I'd be more worried about is Greenland and Antarctica.

 

[BasketCase]

Goodie, another combatant gets in on the issue to mix it up even more.

Things got real interesting with that recent NASA screw-up, and it just keeps getting better.

So now we have even more scenarios to choose from than we did before. Which one is actually gonna happen?

 

[azzaman333]

Oh man, half the ice sheet is gone. You'd think that'd result in higher sea levels and a drowning Bangladesh of something. Someone get Al Gore his Nobel Peace prize!

I sure hope you aren't being serious there, or I'm going to have to shoot you.