In a CO2 haze

Order is manifestly maintained in the universe… governed by the sovereign will of God.
James Prescott Joule—physicist

Sorry it has been so long between posts. I found a site (Click Link) on the physics of CO2 heat absorption by someone who actually understands the science. It was heavy reading, and I cannot begin to understand the math, but after a few days reading, I do have a better understanding of the subject. It is written on two levels: one for people like me and the other for the hard-core science math geeks.

As nearly as I can tell, the writer does not take a side on global warming. He also does not go into why there has been an increase in CO2, or which rise came first: the temperature or the CO2. In his comments section he quickly calms down those who jump to conclusions either way. It all boils down to an increase in CO2 levels will result in a logarithmic increase in temperature. This temperature increase is a scientific reality, but . . . there is always a “but” . . . it is not nearly the rise predicted by the IPCC in its climate models.

To reach the IPCC predicted temperature increases, there has to be an unknown forcing element programmed into the climate models. This unknown forcing element is what makes the IPCC’s heat projections skyrocket.

To learn about the accuracy of climate models, I began delving into how they are made. For this study excursion, I went to the primary source of forecasting models by following a (Link) I found on Climate Depot. Now while I read Climate Depot daily, I think it caters more to the extreme of the global warming skeptics, but in this case the credentials of the articles writers are impeccable.

I next followed all the links in the article (Link),(Link), and (Link). Each of these additional articles is dry reading, but I found them fascinating because they highlight the high error rate in the climate models. They are an indictment of the whole global warming scare (to date, the IPCC has not had a single prediction verified); and the articles are written by the people who developed and run the best weather models in the world; the ones that actually work.

The only answer from the warmers: climate is easier to predict than weather because it uses weather averages to predict trends. I guess that would be fine, except trends bend and trends end. There is nothing in the weather models or the climate models that can predict when or why that takes place. At least the weather modeler’s are honest enough to admit that.

Advertisements
Published in: on May 5, 2010 at 11:23 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags:

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://stlouisooz.wordpress.com/2010/05/05/93/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: