One thought on “How accurate have computer global warming models been so far? Is there consistency between models?”

  1. My reply:

    Sorry, despite closely agreeing with each other, all of today’s general circulation models (GCMs) are close to worthless, based on fake physics framing CO2 on controlling Earth’s surface temperatures. On top of that, they totally fail to handle clouds, especially the great power of cosmic rays to increase cloud cover, totally missing the boat by predicting warming that doesn’t exist on cloudy days.

    General circulation model – Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_circulation_model)
    Scientists Find ‘Man-made Climate Change Doesn’t Exist In Practice’ | PSI Intl (https://principia-scientific.org/scientists-find-man-made-climate-change-doesnt-exist-in-practice/)
    The Essence Of Identifying the ‘Climate Change’ Fraud | PSI Intl (https://principia-scientific.org/the-essence-of-identifying-the-climate-change-fraud/)

    No matter how bad the GCMs are, the IPCC octopus through its kept scientific puppets NASA, NOAA et al. keeps trying to cover it up via tampered temperature data. This is morally bankrupt, and one of many reasons to chuck the IPCC.

    It’s time that atmospheric physicists reclaimed their field from the horde of kept “climate scientists” owned by the globalist Marxist U.N. IPCC and revamped it from the ground up, starting with chucking the fake CO2 greenhouse warming theory that tries to make a greenhouse without glass:

    TLW’s Two Cents Worth on Climate Change (http://www.historyscoper.com/climatetlw.html)

Comments are closed.