Climate models still fail to predict mid- and long-term trends in the climate.The uncertainty of science: Climate models still fail to predict mid- and long-term trends in the climate.

Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right or below. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

The uncertainty of science: Climate models still fail to predict mid- and long-term trends in the climate.

To test the forecast quality of the 23 most important climate models, the AWI scientists investigated how well these models were able to reproduce atmospheric teleconnection patterns over the past 50 years. A total of 9 known circulation patterns were investigated retrospectively, four of which in special detail. The result was that the spatial distribution of atmospheric teleconnection patterns is already described very well by some models. However, none of the models were able to reliably reproduce how strong or weak the Icelandic Low, Azores High and other meteorological centers of action were at a particular time over the last 50 years, i.e. the temporal distribution patterns. [emphasis mine]

The “centers of action” are large global weather patterns like el Nino that can influence the global climate worldwide. Most climate scientists believe that global warming will manifest itself first in these centers of action. Yet, no climate model was able to predict what we know actually happened during the past fifty years with these large centers.

But we must ignore this fact and base all our climate law on what these models predict. What could go wrong?

In related news, the United Kingdom had its coldest autumn since 1993 this year. And if you look at the temperature graph at the link, covering autumn temperatures since 1910, you will notice hardly any change, up or down.



  • JGL

    Does anyone else notice how the argument has turned from “man made global warming” to now

    just “global warming”?

    Mr Zimmerman?

  • Paul Lake

    JGL…. I don’t know what you mean. Most climate scientists are jumping up and down demanding to be heard: Climate change is real, it’s destructive, and it’s caused by humans burning fossil fuels. But too few are listening.

  • JGL

    The argument use to always be underpinned with the “fact” that climate change was

    happening and it was caused by human activity specifically.

    Most interviews I hear now (I happen to be listening to an interview right now on the Brian Leher

    show, the subject is climate change and no mention of it being human caused )

    only identify climate change and not human caused climate change.

    Is there climate change ?

    Yes, the earth like the universe is not static, the climate is always in a state of change, we

    are in the end of a cycle of ice right now. If you have read anything that Mr. Zimmerman has

    posted on the subject, human cause is far from been established as the main driver in climate

    change. I believe it has also been established that the main driver of “human caused” climate

    change has been political. Do humans have an effect on the environment in which they live?

    Of course, but what is that effect really?

    I think the real discussion should be pollution, however the more powerful political tool is human

    caused climate change.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *