10-21-22, 10:48 PM
From HERE
An IPCC observation, triggered by Nic’s new paper and your independent finding.
AR6 based on CMIP6 raised the MINIMUM probable ECS to 2.5C from 1.5C in AR5. Nic redid Sherwood to find ~2. WE independently found ~2. The only two CMIP6 models below 2 were INM CM4.8 and CM5.0. They produced 1.9 and 1.8 respectively. And neither produced a tropical troposphere hotspot, while all the others incorrectly did. This seems to show conclusively that both CMIP6 and IPCC are biased hot, producing climate alarm when none is objectively warranted.
Other BIG IPCC alarms have also proven false:
Arctic summer sea ice did not disappear.
Sea level rise did not accelerate.
Buffered ocean did not ‘acidify; the GBR is doing fine despite Cook University claims otherwise and firing Peter Ridd for challenging those false claims.
An IPCC observation, triggered by Nic’s new paper and your independent finding.
AR6 based on CMIP6 raised the MINIMUM probable ECS to 2.5C from 1.5C in AR5. Nic redid Sherwood to find ~2. WE independently found ~2. The only two CMIP6 models below 2 were INM CM4.8 and CM5.0. They produced 1.9 and 1.8 respectively. And neither produced a tropical troposphere hotspot, while all the others incorrectly did. This seems to show conclusively that both CMIP6 and IPCC are biased hot, producing climate alarm when none is objectively warranted.
Other BIG IPCC alarms have also proven false:
Arctic summer sea ice did not disappear.
Sea level rise did not accelerate.
Buffered ocean did not ‘acidify; the GBR is doing fine despite Cook University claims otherwise and firing Peter Ridd for challenging those false claims.
“A theory that is not refutable by any conceivable event is non-scientific.” – Karl Popper
Terms of Service
Moderation Guidelines
Terms of Service
Moderation Guidelines