Climate Models from 1980 On Had Forecasts That Were 'Excessive,' Inaccurate

As usual, climate change alarmists are full of hot air. A new report provides evidence that global warming is largely a political invention—that climate models have been consistently wrong since 1980. Which begs the question why governments and global organizations are attempting to change political systems, cultures, and business entirely to stop “climate change”?

Bill Gates, one of the biggest pushers of climate alarmism, was recently revealed on video laughing at how the concept of “clean” or “green” energy was basically a scam. Meanwhile the United Nations (UN) admitted it was colluding with Big Tech platforms, including TikTok, Google, and Facebook, to censor climate “misinformation” online—even though the UN loves polluting China.

“[The Daily Skeptic, emphasis added] A major survey into the accuracy of climate models has found that almost all the past temperature forecasts between 1980-2021 were excessive compared with accurate satellite measurements. The findings were recently published by Professor Nicola Scafetta, a physicist from the University of Naples. He attributes the inaccuracies to a limited understanding of Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity (ECS), the number of degrees centigrade the Earth’s temperature will rise with a doubling of carbon dioxide.

Scientists have spent decades trying to find an accurate ECS number, to no avail. Current estimates range from 0.5°C to around 6-7°C. Without knowing this vital figure, the so-called ‘settled’ science narrative around human-caused climate change remains a largely political invention, not a credible scientific proposition. Professor Scafetta has conducted extensive work into climate models and is a long-time critic of their results and forecasts. In a previous work, he said many of the climate models should be ‘dismissed and not used by policymakers’. Along with around 250 professors, he is a signatory to the World Climate Declaration which states there is no climate emergency and also notes climate models are ‘not remotely plausible as global tools’.”

But World Economic Forum (WEF) and the UN will continue to try and make a world where you “own nothing, have no privacy” and are happy in order to save the planet. That’s what they call following the science.

“Scafetta’s latest work grouped 38 major climate models into low, medium and high ECS values, ranging between 1.8°C and 5.7°C. He found that models in the medium and high category ‘ran hot’ in over 95% and 97% of cases respectively. The lower models were said to have done better when compared to global warming calculated for the period by the major surface datasets of 0.52-0.58°C. But the UAH satellite data showed warming up to 30% less during this period, suggesting even the low warming models produced “excessive warming” from 1980-2021.

According to Scafetta, these results are showed that the ECS figure could be as low as 1.2-2°C. Particular concern is expressed about surface temperature records that ‘appear to be severely affected by non-climatic warming biases’. Scafetta concludes that surface-based temperature records are likely to be affected by warming biases. . .and subject to natural oscillations that are not reproduced by climate models. . .

Scafetta’s work is vital in providing a realistic insight into the dominant role played by climate models in promoting the command-and-control Net Zero political agenda. Many of the constantly promoted climate thermogeddon scares use forecasts based on high ECS values. . .[alarmists claim] that we are heading for a 2-3°C increase in global temperature in the near future. In the absence of any definitive ECS figure, these predictions are guesses.

In fact, once the ECS figure falls to around 1°C, it is moving into margin of error territory.”

Climate changes. That is the nature of climate. And it’s not just produced by SUVs and other man-made inventions, or how did we have an Ice Age in prehistoric times and then come out of it (as I’m sure most of these climate scientists would say happened)?

Furthermore, remember that plants—including food crops—need carbon (which is in fact part of nature) to survive. Efforts to eliminate as much carbon as possible would end up sabotaging crops and plants. But maybe that’s the idea?

“The atmosphere is a chaotic system with many powerful influences reacting unpredictably with each other. . .Furthermore, it is possible that carbon dioxide becomes ‘saturated’ beyond certain levels and its effect as a warming gas rapidly declines.

What we do know is that over the last 20 years, global warming has started to run out of steam. . .As it happens, the two adjustments since 2013 by the U.K.’s Met Office to its HadCRUT global surface temperature record have increased recent warming by a similar amount. Similar upward adjustments are to be found in the other major global datasets. A previous temperature pause from about 1998-2010 is no longer visible in these records.

Claims of ‘record’ heat years and ever higher temperatures are taken exclusively from the surface records. The satellite record is largely ignored. There are even attempts to cancel the inconvenient figures.”

Just like with the Covid-19 “vaccines,” the woke “experts” don’t really want to follow the science. They want to use pseudo-science to achieve a political goal and a certain amount of control over others.