Duke University study: IPCC climate models are wrong

Surprise! Surprise! A new study done by researchers at Duke University States global warming hasn’t happened as fast as expected. According to the UK Daily Mail, the new study, based on 1000 years of temperature records, points out that surface temperatures over the course of ten years can account for ups and downs in warming rates thanks to (you guessed it) natural variability. Variability that is caused by interactions with oceans and the atmosphere along with other natural factors.

The research involved using observed data absent climate models to measure the decade-to-decade variability. The Daily Mail article also points out:

‘At any given time, we could start warming at a faster rate if greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere increase without any offsetting changes in aerosol concentrations or natural variability,’ said Wenhong Li, assistant professor of climate at Duke, who conducted the study with [Patrick] Brown.

The team examined whether climate models, such as those used by the IPCC, accurately account for natural chaotic variability that can occur in the rate of global warming.
To test these, created a new statistical model based on reconstructed empirical records of surface temperatures over the last 1,000 years.

‘By comparing our model against theirs, we found that climate models largely get the ‘big picture’ right but seem to underestimate the magnitude of natural decade-to-decade climate wiggles,’ Brown said.

‘Our model shows these wiggles can be big enough that they could have accounted for a reasonable portion of the accelerated warming we experienced from 1975 to 2000, as well as the reduced rate in warming that occurred from 2002 to 2013.’

‘Statistically, it’s pretty unlikely that an 11-year hiatus in warming, like the one we saw at the start of this century, would occur if the underlying human-caused warming was progressing at a rate as fast as the most severe IPCC projections,’ Brown said.

‘Hiatus periods of 11 years or longer are more likely to occur under a middle-of-the-road scenario.’

How about that? A study on global warming that doesn’t involving using climate models but results in demonstrating global temperatures are based on natural variability and other natural factors. On scientist involved in the research stressed that there is no guarantee that the rate of warming will remain steady in the years ahead but this study confirms what a lot of scientists who study global warming have suspected all along. That is climate models aren’t data and are not good measurements of climate activity.