//
you're reading...
Climate Science, IPCC, Jo Nova, Settled science?

IPCC plays hot-spot hidey games in AR5 — denies 28 million weather balloons work properly

It was a major PR failure in 2007. The IPCC won’t make the same mistake again. They’ve dumped the hot-spot graphs.

The classic hot spot prediction (A) compared to 28 million weatherballoons (B).

The classic hot spot prediction (A) compared to 28 million weatherballoons (B).

In AR4 they put in two graphs that show how badly their models really do. In the next report they plan to bury the spectacular missing-hot-spot images through “graph-trickery” and selective blindness. Each round of IPCC reports takes the spin-factor up another notch. It’s carefully crafted.

It’s hot-spot hidey games and PR tricks

In the new extra-tricky AR5 version, the IPCC “quote the critics” and ignore them at the same time. That way they can say they include the McIntyre’s, McKitrick’s, Douglass’, and Christy’s: the words are on the page, but that doesn’t mean the information is used in the conclusions. The models have failed and they bury that undeniable result under the clutter.  (You’ll need to read the fine print). There is no acknowledgement that this issue of the “hot spot” drives more amplification of predicted warming in their models than any other point (though that is obvious and implicit in Fig 9.44, and you can see that below). Which policymaker exactly is going to notice that?

Read complete article on Jo Nova’s site.

Discussion

2 thoughts on “IPCC plays hot-spot hidey games in AR5 — denies 28 million weather balloons work properly

Add your thoughts. . .

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Follow me on Twitter

Flag Counter