Impact of Physics Parameterization Ordering in a Global Atmosphere Model - Donahue - 2018 - Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems - Wiley Online Library. GRACE Satellite Measurements Show Models For Water Storage Trends Have Been Useless So Far! A recently published paper appearing in the PNAS authored by Bridget R. Scanlon et al reveals that calculations of water storage in many river basins from commonly used global computer models differ markedly from storage estimates from GRACE satellites. Source: PNAS, Bridget R. Scanlon et al Because we increasingly rely on models to project the impacts of humans and climate on water resources, it’s crucial we know how reliable these models really are.
In total the authors evaluated model reliability based on a comparison of decadal trends (2002–2014) in land water storage from seven global models (WGHM, PCR-GLOBWB, GLDAS NOAH, MOSAIC, VIC, CLM, and CLSM) to trends from three Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellite solutions in 186 river basins, representing roughly 60% of global land area. They found that the models underestimate the large decadal (2002–2014) trends in water storage relative to GRACE satellites. Scientists: ‘Falsified’ Climate Models ‘Do Not Employ Known Physics Fully’…‘Don’t Agree With Reality’ Many new scientific papers affirm climate model results conflict with one another, diverge from observations, and aren’t fully rooted in established physics.
Image Source: Essex and Tsonis, 2018 Climate models are predicated on the assumption that greenhouse gases exert fundamental control on the Earth’s climate system. That’s why for decades it’s been predicted that disaster will befall the planet as a consequence of rising CO2 emissions. Image Source: Associated Press (1989) And yet contrary to how they are popularly portrayed, climate models do not fully employ the laws of physics in their representations (Essex and Tsonis, 2018).
This is likely why climate model outputs are (a) often widely different from one another and (b) frequently diverge from real-world observations. We Lack Understanding of Climate Mechanisms “[C]limate changes in polar areas remain difficult to predict, which indicates that the underlying mechanisms of polar amplification remain uncertain and debatable.” 1. 2.
A ground-breaking new paper putting climate models to the test yields an unexpected result – steps and pauses in the climate signal | Watts Up With That? A ground-breaking new paper has recently been published in Earth System Dynamics that really turns the idea of direct linear warming of the atmosphere on it’s ear, suggesting a “store and release mechanism” by the oceans, which explains why there seemed to be a shift in global temperature during the 1997/98 super El Nino followed by a “pause” in global temperatures. Remember the “escalator” graph from wrongly named “Skeptcal Science” designed to shame climate skeptics? Looks like that may have been an accidentally prescient backfire of their part based on the findings of this new paper. The paper is: “Reconciling the signal and noise of atmospheric warming on decadal timescales“, Roger N.
Jones and James H. Ricketts, Earth System Dynamics, 8 (1), 2017. Abstract: “Interactions between externally forced and internally generated climate variations on decadal timescales is a major determinant of changing climate risk. The results: Here they outline their reasoning for finding steps in warming: Upper Atmosphere Temperature Trends Models vs Measurements. Paper Reviewed Zhao, L., Xu, J., Powell, A.M., Jiang, Z. and Wang, D. 2016. Use of SSU/MSU Satellite Observations to Validate Upper Atmospheric Temperature Trends in CMIP5 Simulations. Remote Sensing 8: 10.3390/rs8010013.
In a test of climate-model-based projections, Zhao et al. (2016) conducted an inter-comparison of temperature trends extending from the middle troposphere to the upper stratosphere as derived from real-world satellite observations made by Stratospheric Sounding Units (SSUs), Microwave Sounding Units (MSUs) and the Advanced Microwave Sounding Unit-A (AMSU) as well as CMIP5 climate model simulations. And what did this comparison reveal? The five researchers report that "CMIP5 simulations  underestimated the stratospheric cooling in the tropics and  overestimated the cooling over the Antarctic compared to the satellite observations.
" Study: Another failure of climate models – they can’t handle barometric pressure change. One of the most basic meteorological factors isn’t handled by climate models – and they run off in a “hockey stick” style. From the UNIVERSITY OF LINCOLN Climate models fail to simulate recent air-pressure changes over Greenland Climatologists may be unable to accurately predict regional climate change over the North Atlantic because computer model simulations have failed to accurately include air pressure changes that have taken place in the Greenland region over the last three decades. This deficiency may mean regional climate predictions for the UK and parts of Europe could be inaccurate, according to new research published today. Researchers compared real data with simulation data over a 30 year period and found that the simulations on average showed slightly decreasing air pressure in the Greenland region, when in fact, the real data showed a significant increase in high air pressure – or so-called ‘Greenland blocking’ – during the summer months.
The paper: Edward Hanna et al. Abstract. Atmospheric Observations Contradict Global Warming Theory. Update Nov. 13, 2018 H/T Yonason for linking to Blair Macdonald’s discussion of CO2 behavior in the atmosphere. At the end is a video and link to his paper and website. This paper just published Has global warming already arrived? By C.A.Varotsos and M.N.Efstathiou (H/T Dennis Bird) Excerpts in italics with my bolds. Highlights • The global warming during 1978–2018 was not more enhanced at high latitudes near the surface. • The intrinsic properties of the lower stratospheric temperature are not related to those in the troposphere. • The results obtained do not reveal the global warming occurrence. Abstract The enhancement of the atmospheric greenhouse effect due to the increase in the atmospheric greenhouse gases is often considered as responsible for global warming (known as greenhouse hypothesis of global warming).
Our analysis did not show a consistent warming with gradual increase from low to high latitudes in both hemispheres, as it should be from the global warming theory. Conclusions. Revisiting the Mystery of Stratospheric Cooling. New Science: A Main Tenet Of Anthropogenic Global Warming Has Been Falsified By Observations.
By Kenneth Richard on 31. December 2018 Climate models postulate that increasing CO2 concentrations will intensify the Earth’s water cycle. This intensification is believed to eventually result in dangerous (3°C and up) global warming. Observational evidence has thus far falsified these IPCC-endorsed claims. Image Source: IPCC WG1 According to climate models, water vapor and precipitation trends were supposed to have been enhanced as a consequence of rising anthropogenic CO2 emissions. And yet after compiling decades of observational and evidence, it has been determined there has been no detectable global-scale human influence on the Earth’s hydrological cycle. Image Source(s): Miralles et al., 2013 and Vonder Harr et al., 2012 There have been many new scientific papers published that document the observed lack of any detectable global trends in the Earth’s hydrological cycle during the last century, or since anthropogenic CO2 emissions began rising dramatically.
Nguyen et al., 2018.