|
GHCN = Global Historical Climatology Network. This might be of interest:
Portal:Global warming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shows global surface temperature increased 0.74 ± 0.18 Deg C during the 100 years ending in 2005. Also goes on to say:
"Climate model projections summarized in the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) report indicate that global surface temperature will probably rise a further 1.1 to 6.4 Deg C during the twenty-first century. The uncertainty in this estimate arises from the use of models with differing climate sensitivity, and the use of differing estimates of future greenhouse gas emissions. Some other uncertainties include how warming and related changes will vary from region to region around the globe. Although most studies focus on the period up to 2100, warming is expected to continue beyond 2100, even if emissions have stopped, because of the large heat capacity of the oceans and the lifespan of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere."
I have worked every working day with science for over 40 years and this stuff is not science. This is statistics and how they are analysed and interpreted to produce 'estimates'. If, as a senior scientist, I was shown such wildly differing results in a report (or series of reports) the results would not see the light of day and be filed away under 'ephemeral' until the science has developed enough and can actually produce more realistic forecasts.
Also, in this wilderness of statistical analysis and wildly differing estimates, how does the IPCC separate natural global warming from man-made global warming? |
|