It is time to devalue the software research of climate models

“…When the table of contents of the most recent issue of the American Geophysical Union’s (AGU) Geophysical Research Letters was released on August 16, 2023, I could not help noticing it contained a string of papers repeatedly showing that the models used to prove the coming fire of global warming continue to remain untrustworthy and unreliable. All of the following papers indicated biases and uncertainties of both climate models as well as the data they used, and each did so in their titles:

• • Climate Models Underestimate Dynamic Cloud Feedbacks in the Tropics
  • Most Global Gauging Stations Present Biased Estimations of Total Catchment Discharge
  • Different Methods in Assessing El Niño Flavors Lead to Opposite Results
  • Biases in Estimating Long-Term Recurrence Intervals of Extreme Events Due To Regionalized Sampling
  • A Pacific Tropical Decadal Variability Challenge for Climate Models
  • Implications of Warm Pool Bias in CMIP6 Models on the Northern Hemisphere Wintertime Subtropical Jet and Precipitation

All of these papers considered the models valid for future research, and were instead focused on refining and increasing the accuracy of the models. All however showed once again how little we should trust these models…”

Using models that can’t reverse predict the last 20 years of weather to predict the future 100 years of weather is bone-headed stupid. That’s not science it’s magic.

Related:

America’s wealthiest create 40% of emissions, but lecture rest about being green, study finds