Met Office forecasts become less alarming

[marchesarosa]

Over time the Met Office decadal forecasts have become less and less alarming!



HadGEM2 (red) is the forecast the Met Office submitted to the upcoming AR5 IPCC report to be published September; HadCM3 (green), was used in the 2011 decadal forecast ; HadGEM3 (blue), is the current (2012) decadal forecast.

David Whitehouse, the sacked BBC Science Correspondent (and the only Scientist amongst the Beeb's environment correspondents) wrote about the less and less alarmist forecasts from the Met Office this January here www.thegwpf.org/met-office-forecasts-global-temperature-rise/

The changing forecasts deserve a little of the oxygen of publicity, don't you think? According to the latest from the Met it looks like the unexpected (by alarmists) 'plateau' in global mean temperatures is set to continue into the future. This is certainly more credible than its previous "ever onwards and upwards" efforts at crystal ball gazing! What a pity "Nature" saw fit to ignore the latest Met Office offering and promoted the 2011 version in a recent article!

Was it deliberate obfuscation or just plain malicious scare-mongering spin?


More in Steve McIntyre's article here
climateaudit.org/2013/07/15/nature-hides-the-decline/

[marchesarosa]

From a recent interview with Meteorologist, Hans von Storch, in Spiegel International On-Line. www.spiegel.de/international/world/interview-hans-von-storch-on-problems-with-climate-change-models-a-906721.html

SPIEGEL: Just since the turn of the millennium, humanity has emitted another 400 billion metric tons of CO2 into the atmosphere, yet temperatures haven’t risen in nearly 15 years. What can explain this?

Storch: So far, no one has been able to provide a compelling answer to why climate change seems to be taking a break. We’re facing a puzzle. Recent CO2 emissions have actually risen even more steeply than we feared. As a result, according to most climate models, we should have seen temperatures rise by around 0.25 degrees Celsius (0.45 degrees Fahrenheit) over the past 10 years. That hasn’t happened. In fact, the increase over the last 15 years was just 0.06 degrees Celsius (0.11 degrees Fahrenheit) — a value very close to zero. This is a serious scientific problem that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will have to confront when it presents its next Assessment Report late next year.

SPIEGEL: How long will it still be possible to reconcile such a pause in global warming with established climate forecasts?

Storch: If things continue as they have been, in five years, at the latest, we will need to acknowledge that something is fundamentally wrong with our climate models. A 20-year pause in global warming does not occur in a single modeled scenario. But even today, we are finding it very difficult to reconcile actual temperature trends with our expectations.

[marchesarosa]

MEDIA BIAS: US NETWORKS IGNORE GLOBAL WARMING STANDSTILL

Date: 13/07/13 Julia Seymour, The Wall Street Journal

Since Jan. 1, 2013, ABC, CBS and NBC morning and evening news programs have aired 92 stories about “climate change” or “global warming.” Not a single one of those stories mentioned the “warming plateau” reported even by The New York Times on June 10.


The Times wrote, “The rise in the surface temperature of earth has been markedly slower over the last 15 years than in the 20 years before that. And that lull in warming has occurred even as greenhouse gases have accumulated in the atmosphere at a record pace.” Even though the Times piece wasn’t published until June 10, a warming slowdown had been reported by foreign media outlets in November 2012, and by The Economist online in March, Reuters in April and BBC online in May of 2013.

The problems with climate forecasting models weren’t mentioned either, even though a researcher at Sweden’s University of Gothenburg found that many climate models couldn’t correctly model known temperatures in China. Investor’s Business Daily reported on March 28 that “Only half of the 21 analyzed climate models were able to reproduce the changes in some regions of China,” he said. “Few models can well reproduce the nationwide change.”
online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324425204578599743078256264.html