1.25 degrees F = 0.75 degrees C.
From the Climate Change 2001, Working Group I: The Scientific Basis 9.2.2.4 Uncertainty):
Missing or misrepresented physics: No attempt has been made to quantify the uncertainty in model projections of climate change due to missing or misrepresented physics. Current models attempt to include the dominant physical processes that govern the behavior and the response of the climate system to specified forcing scenarios. Studies of "missing" processes are often carried out, for instance of the effect of aerosols on cloud lifetimes, but until the results are well-founded, of appreciable magnitude, and robust in a range of models, they are considered to be studies of sensitivity rather than projections of climate change. Physical processes which are misrepresented in one or more, but not all, models will give rise to differences which will be reflected in the ensemble standard deviation.
So, the physics (and probably the chemistry) of these models is wrong (or at least incomplete) but that's no big deal to those who use them.
I've downloaded the current climate model software used by these folks (CAM2) and, as soon as my Beowulf cluster is up and running, intentd to investigate the sensitivity of model predictions to the uncertainties in their underlying representation of the physics (and chemistry) involved.
How in the hell do you explain this:
Winter in Big Cities of the East Ranked Among the Coldest Since 1950 -
Written March 10, 2003
by Joe D'Aleo
Chief WSI/INTELLICAST Meteorologist
In our winter outlook in the fall we showed why the oceans were in a mode, which favored enhanced high latitude blocking, which would make this El Nino colder than the ones we were used to in recent decades.
The degree of high latitude blocking is measured by two climate indices, the North Atlantic and Arctic Oscillations. In recent stories, we showed how the negative mode of both modes favored colder and often snowier than normal conditions in the eastern United States and Europe, even in El Nino winters. The indices were at or near the most negative values observed since 1950 especially during the early winter from October to December.
![]() |
October to December Arctic Oscillation values were the most negative since 1950. This high latitude blocking helped generate large polar and arctic air masses that helped build deep snowcover and make the winter very cold for many areas in the hemisphere. |
![]() |
October to February 2002/03 average snowcover for the Northern Hemisphere was at the highest level in the data set eclipsing the previous record set in the winter of 1976/77. From CPC: ftp://ftp.ncep.noaa.gov/pub/cpc/wd52dg/snow/snw_cvr_area/NH_AREA |
BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS
|
Year
|
Average Temperature
|
1976/77
|
35.42
|
2002/03
|
35.72
|
CENTRAL PARK, NEW YORK
|
Year
|
Average Temperature
|
1976/77
|
37.55
|
1967/68
|
38.25
|
1977/78
|
39.35
|
2002/03
|
39.70
|
ROCHESTER, NEW YORK
|
Year
|
Average Temperature
|
1976/77
|
29.48
|
1993/94
|
30.38
|
1962/63
|
30.38
|
1981/82
|
31
|
1978/79
|
31.44
|
1969/70
|
31.56
|
2002/03
|
31.56
|
BALTIMORE, MARYLAND
|
Year
|
Average Temperature
|
1976/77
|
37.04
|
1962/63
|
37.16
|
2002/03
|
38.63
|