New studies reported by CNN (here) are simply off-target. Why? Because they are based on unreliable climate models that rely on representations, not physics. Consider the graph below where the speculations of over 100 model runs are compared to actual temperature measurements.
The idea that a particular assertion of science cannot be questioned is absurd and undermines science itself. Questioning science is how science progresses. Question the science and let the card where they may…
“The Trump administration is debating whether to launch a governmentwide effort to question the science of climate change, an effort that critics say is an attempt to undermine the long-established consensus human activity is fueling the Earth’s rising temperatures.” click here
Kravtsov, S. (2017), Pronounced differences between observed and CMIP5-simulated multidecadal climate variability in the twentieth century, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 5749–5757, doi:10.1002/2017GL074016.
Identification and dynamical attribution of multidecadal climate undulations to either variations in external forcings or to internal sources is one of the most important topics of modern climate science, especially in conjunction with the issue of human-induced global warming. Here we utilize ensembles of twentieth century climate simulations to isolate the forced signal and residual internal variability in a network of observed and modeled climate indices. The observed internal variability so estimated exhibits a pronounced multidecadal mode with a distinctive spatiotemporal signature, which is altogether absent in model simulations. This single mode explains a major fraction of model-data differences over the entire climate index network considered; it may reflect either biases in the models’ forced response or models’ lack of requisite internal dynamics, or a combination of both.
“One of the most popular alarmist arguments is likening the “consensus climate scientists” to medical doctors. For example, this essay on “climate denial” from Andrew Winston at medium.com took part in the bashing of recently hired climate skeptic Brett Stevens at the NYT.” click here for WUWT
“In late 2015, Soon, Connolly, and Connolly (hereafter SCC15) published a comprehensive (101 pages) analysis of how the modern anthropogenic global warming (AGW) paradigm has been constructed. The paper, published in Earth Science Reviews, is entitled Re-evaluating the role of solar variability on Northern Hemisphere temperature trends since the 19th century.” click here
“20 years ago climate models were celebrated as a huge breakthrough. Finally we were able to reproduce reality in the computer, which had been becoming ever more powerful and faster. Everyone believed that only minor adjustments were necessary, and the target would be reached. But when the computer-crunched results were finally compared to reality, huge unexplained discrepancies appeared.” click here for Notrickszone.