Over at climate scientist Judy Curry's blog, there is a discussion about the pause in global warming. Some of the commenters were curious at how well past Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's forecasts have worked out. The answer is very poorly.
Here is an example from their 2001 Report:
|click to enlarge|
If you look at temperatures for 2012, they are outside of the forecast range as are 2011's, all on the cold side.
I did the same thing for their 2004 forecasts with the same result. Temperatures outside of the 95% confidence interval on the cold side.
While it is important to note the IPCC does not have skill at forecasting future temperatures, that is not the main takeaway. The main takeaway,
Earth's temperatures, as measured by HADCRUT, are approximately the same in 2013 as
they were in 1990, an interval of 23 years without net warming!
Global warming advocates will undoubtedly accuse me of "cherrypicking" -- choosing dates so as to make my point. But, these are not my dates, they are the dates chosen by the IPCC for their forecast. While ocean heat content is actually the more important metric, this is the metric the IPCC chose to emphasize.
It is long past time for climate science to own up to this: If climate science cannot make an accurate 20 year forecast, there is absolutely no reason to believe their forecasts for 40 or 60 years would be any better.
It also calls into serious question the entire notion that human beings are causing (present tense) catastrophic global warming. It also appears earth's climate is less sensitive to carbon dioxide than has been thought.