Fathers for Life

Working in the interests of the owners of rural electric services 

| Home | Search | In The News | Contact Us | Share

 
Site Map
Table of Contents
Addresses
Alternative Energy Sources
Billing
Contacting the Bruderheim REA
Deregulation of the Electricity Industry
E-mail List-Server
Energy Purchase Contracts (Electricity only) Price Comparison
Energy Utilities Board
Gas Meters
Global Warming Explained
History
Links Page
Miscellaneous
News
PC Tips
Pole-testing, pole-changes and line work
Popular Pages
Taxes
Tips on Energy Savings
Weather

 

You are visitor

at the website of the Bruderheim REA since March 27, 2002

 
 
 

Arctic Climate Change — Greenhouse models don't pan out that well

There are good reasons for that.  First and foremost, the models don't account for the most important greenhouse gas of all, about 3,000 times more important than CO2, water vapor. 
    For that reason it would not do the performance of the models justice to call them simulations.  After all, the models don't simulate the real world but only reflect hypotheses by climate alarmists who don't wish to, and can't, take in all of the factors affecting variations in climate trends. 
    However, variations in the amounts of atmospheric water vapor, too, are only a consequence of what steers the global climate, and that is almost exclusively nothing other than the variations in solar radiance.  The climate models so beloved by climate alarmists don't take the considerable and extensive solar variations into account either.
    Two plus two does not equal five; and the Sun is a variable star, not a "fixed" star.  As my mother was fond of saying, nothing can remain hidden under the Sun.  It appears that also applies to the ideology driving the climate alarmists who promote the needless fear of man-made global warming.
 

Arctic Climate Change — Greenhouse Simulation : 1961-1990
GCM Greenhouse Runs

Source: [U.S.] National Center for Climate Research (The preceding link no longer functions.  Not even the archived copy of that file exists anymore.)

National Center for Atmospheric Research Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Canadian Climate Center Australia's Common-
wealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
Germany's Deutsches Klima-
rechen-
zentrum
Max Planck Inst. and DKRZ : ECHAM 4 Center for Climate Research Studies Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research
(NCAR) (GFDL) (CCC) (CSIRO) (DKRZ) (MPCI) (CCSR) (HADCM3)

Sea Level Pressure:
(NCAR) (GFDL) (CCC) (CSIRO) (DKRZ) (MPCI) (CCSR) (HADCM3)
ncar.slp.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3405 bytes) ccc.slp.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3658 bytes) csiro.slp.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3396 bytes) dkci.slp.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3344 bytes) mpci.slp.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3330 bytes) ccsr.slp.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3246 bytes) had3.slp.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3309 bytes)

Surface Air Temperature:
(NCAR) (GFDL) (CCC) (CSIRO) (DKRZ) (MPCI) (CCSR) (HADCM3)
ncar.temp.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3285 bytes) gfdl.temp.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3324 bytes) ccc.temp.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3645 bytes) ccsr.temp.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3398 bytes) dkci.temp.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3528 bytes) mpci.temp.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3670 bytes) ccsr.temp.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3398 bytes) had3.temp.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3835 bytes)
Note: During the 1961-1990 interval the actual mean temperature for the Edmonton rural area was 2.1Celsius (3.6C in the City of Edmonton).  Reading the temperature values as best as can be done from the graphs, the various models indicate values for the Edmonton area in the 1961-1990 interval of 6C (NCAR), 0C (GFDL), 4C (CCC), 3C (CSIRO), 1C (DKRZ), 4C (MPCI), 3C (CCSR), and 3C (HADCM3) respectively.

Precipitation:

(NCAR) (GFDL) (CCC) (CSIRO) (DKRZ) (MPCI) (CCSR) (HADCM3)
ncar.prec.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (4155 bytes) gfdl.prec.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3868 bytes) ccc.prec.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (4157 bytes) ccsr.prec.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3585 bytes) dkci.prec.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3847 bytes) mpci.prec.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (4152 bytes) ccsr.prec.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3585 bytes) had3.prec.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (4312 bytes)
Note: The actual average precipitation for the Edmonton region was about 1.3 mm/day for the 1961-1990 interval.  The various models show the average daily precipitation for that interval to be 2.4 mm (NCAR), 2.3 mm (GFDL), 2.4 mm (CCC), 2.2 mm (CSIRO), 2.3 mm (DKRZ), 2.0 mm (MPCI), 2.5 mm (CCSR), and 2.3 mm (HADCM3) respectively.

Solar Flux:

(NCAR) (GFDL) (CCC) (CSIRO) (DKRZ) (MPCI) (CCSR) (HADCM3)
ncar.frsa.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3718 bytes) gfdl.frsa.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3735 bytes) ccc.frsa.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3456 bytes) csiro.frsa.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3754 bytes) dkci.frsa.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3642 bytes) mpci.frsa.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3615 bytes) ccsr.frsa.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3740 bytes) had3.frsa.ann.gh.61-90t.gif (3920 bytes)

See also a commentary discussing another climate model that was used to assess the respective accuracies of two data sets of temperature records that were derived using satellite measurements:

Splitting Hairs with a Hatchet: Climate Model Not Up to Task of Determining Real-World Tropospheric Temperature Trend

Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change
Editorial Commentary
Volume 6, Number 19: 7 April 2003

The calculations done by General Circulation Models (GCMs) are the main source of the information that fuels the global warming hysteria.  Nevertheless, not one of them comes acceptably close to accurately calculating what the climate presently is at any location, let alone of the whole Earth.  Not only that, but all of the GCMs differ widely from one another as to what the climate was in the past, and as to what it is supposed to be in the future.

Therein lies the problem.  No one in his right mind will base any decisions about the future on tools that cannot determine with acceptable accuracy what the present is and the past was.

__________________
Posted 2003 01 21
Updates:
2003 05 06 (added reference to comparison of results of modelling used to assess the accuracy of actual global temperature measurements)