Met Office Confirm Their Climate Models Are Invalidated
By Paul Homewood
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulhudson/posts/The-IPCC-report-is-the-science-settled
Another excellent post from Paul Hudson raises many of the criticisms others have been making about the latest IPCC Report and its failure to deal with the issue of the temperature standstill.
Interestingly, he refers back to a Met Office study in 2009, which dealt with, what was then, a ten year standstill.
The Met paper, “Do global temperature trends over the last decade falsify climate predictions?”, by J Knight and others, had this to say:
Near-zero and even negative trends are common for intervals of a decade or less in the simulations, due to the model’s internal climate variability. The simulations rule out (at the 95% level) zero trends for intervals
of 15 yr or more, suggesting that an observed absence of warming of this duration is needed to create a discrepancy with the expected present-day warming rate.
TRANSLATION – A standstill of 15 years or more invalidates the models.
Settled science?
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
It would appear that the Met Office have been hoisted by their own petard.
Long may they hang there for all to see.
Elizabethan English: “hoist” = blown up
“petard” = satchel charge, bomb (derived from French, “fart”)
Everything from their physics to their model mathematics invalidates them; the proof of the pudding in the “projection” stats, which now give the real world lie to their video game fictions.
Ah, but, but, what about the MO’s 2012 super improved 5 year long decadal model prediction, projection, prophesy (dyo chuffin strikethrough)? How is it doing?
Don’t tell me you forgotten about out it? Come on man get a grip” You must remember, it took the whole of the MO’s PR, Media and Social Media department to decide that the best possible exposure it could achieve was to superimpose it on top of the previous years graffiti on Christmas Eve afternoon.
I often wonder if the decision was made during the Xmas party?
Indeed. Perhaps it’s also time to recall that the latest one is not the one they submitted to the IPCC for AR5, as recounted at CA
http://climateaudit.org/2013/07/15/nature-hides-the-decline/
And also indeed!
Michael thank you for reminding me, especially:-
Quite a striking comparison well worth revisiting.
The only thing that is settled about the science is that, like all atoms and molecules, CO² absorpes photonic radiation and expells it immediately. That’s it. That it warms the planet …. not proven.