New analysis helps reconcile differences between satellites and climate models

phys.org ^ | 11/22/2022

[devane617]

Satellite observations and computer simulations are important tools for understanding past changes in Earth's climate and for projecting future changes.

However, satellite observations consistently show less warming than climate model simulations from 1979 to the present, especially in the tropical troposphere (the lowest ~15 km of Earth's atmosphere). This difference has raised concerns that models may overstate future temperature changes.

Rather than being an indicator of fundamental model errors, the model-satellite difference can largely be explained by natural fluctuations in Earth's climate and imperfections in climate-model forcing agents, according to new research by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) scientists.

"Natural climate variability appears to have partly masked warming over the satellite era," said Stephen Po-Chedley, a LLNL climate scientist and lead author of a paper appearing in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The results of the study provide an improved understanding of the causes of historical changes in climate and increase confidence in model simulations of continued global warming over the 21st century.

[devane617]

Ok, so satellite observations say warming is bunk. Now we fix data so it matches a global warming propaganda. Problem solved.

[Army Air Corps]

Ping.

[Army Air Corps]

Ping.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

The solubility of CO₂ in water is inversely proportional to temperature

Since CO₂ is soluble in water and the oceans cover a majority of the Earth's surface, the oceans sequester more CO₂ than any other CO₂ sink.

Because of the inverse solubility of CO₂ with temperature, the colder the oceans get, the more CO₂ they can absorb.

Conversely, when the oceans get warmer, they expel CO_2.

Atmospheric CO₂ therefore follows global temperatures, it does not cause them.

You can see the yearly global atmospheric CO₂ fluctuation as the oceans warm and cool with the seasons in the NOAA graph below.

The "settled science" that CO₂ is a "greenhouse gas" that causes "climate change" is therefore a complete and utter lie.

[HighSierra5]

Climate change. One of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetrated on mankind.

[DannyTN]

This is a climate model:

[Yo-Yo]

Ok, so satellite observations say warming is bunk. Now we fix data so it matches a global warming propaganda. Problem solved.

As has been done for the past 20 years that I have been following this whole Climate Change cult.

As documented over and over again by Watts Up With That, historical temperature records worldwide have been "adjusted" downwards "in light of new information regarding historical errors," and in the process makes today's temperatures look even hotter than in the past.

This has made the past 30-50 years have a much steeper temperature rise curve than before the adjustments to the historical record.

[hinckley buzzard]

If you cut through the gobbledegook they are saying that hypothetical projections don’t match actual measurement and observation (which we have always known), so it must be the “natural variations” that are at fault, not the faulty models.

[SubMareener]

>>> and imperfections in climate-model forcing agents

YES!!! ITS THE SUN, STUPID!

[TexasFreeper2009]

Natural climate variability appears to have partly masked warming over the satellite era...

OR.....

The satellites have shown that our models were wrong when it comes to man-made global warming!

but nooooooooooooooooo

they always assume their models are right and try to adjust everything else to fit that narrative.

[Gene Eric]

>> New analysis helps reconcile differences between satellites and climate models

embarrassing

[EEGator]

Kelly Bundy?

[hinckley buzzard]

It’s not a complete and utter lie, CO2 does operate as a greenhouse gas, but the consequences of increases in the atmosphere are trivial. Like most of nature, the greenhouse gas effect has diminishing returns. As concentration goes up from present levels, the added greenhouse effect levels out, and adding to the CO2 level at this point has almost no effect at all. If the much feared “doubling” of CO2 does occur, it will have no noticeable effect, and all the greenies will have a new problem to solve.

[Governor Dinwiddie]

New "analysis" with new and improved "fudge factors". Have it your way!

[G Larry]

"Rather than being an indicator of fundamental model errors, the model-satellite difference can largely be explained by natural fluctuations in Earth's climate and imperfections in climate-model forcing agents..."

Uh...that's because the "fundamental model errors" are a feature, not a bug.

"Natural fluctuations in Earth's climate" are precisely what is being exploited to pretend there is a problem to be solved.

[struggle]

1. Put satellites in the sky in the 70s
2. Use the 2M temperature to track the temps on the earth for decades
3. Push climate change until people start talking about the “great pause” or the fact that for 25 years no change in the temperature has occurred.
4. NOAA etc switch to ground based stations during Obama years, which in the arctic are many times located over asphalt and in an inhabited area, which then skews the temps for 1000s of miles of surrounding tundra higher.
5. People notice this is false and want to return to satellite but they have to skew it to match their projections.

This process will be harder to hide as the winters become worse. I think we’re in an inflection point back to colder weather as Greenland has its highest snowmass ever. In addition, the world snowfall amount is higher than usual.

[Bryan24]

The empirical data doesn’t match the model.

Conclusion: The empirical data is wrong.

Dogma as science.

[butlerweave]

Climate is Natural and good weather doesn’t mean Climate Crisis ,LOL

[eyeamok]

The satellite measurements demonstrate we are full of shit and lying about man made Global Warming, so we are adjusting the satellite outcomes to match our fraudulent models and scams.