Dr. Roy Spencer, a top scientist specializing in climate, wrote a report for Heritage which he summarized on his own web site.
Spencer compared observed warming in the U.S. corn belt during the summer, between 1973 and 2022–a 50-year period–with the warming that was predicted by the major climate models. He found that all of the models yielded more warming than actually occurred, most to an absurd degree. This chart shows the results:
It should not need to be said that a model is not evidence of anything. A model is a hypothesis. Like any scientific hypothesis, it is confirmed or refuted by observation. A model that is refuted by observation is worthless. And yet, these models, which have repeatedly been shown to be wrong, are the basis for enormously destructive policies that have been adopted across much of the western world.
Someone pointed out with respect to these data–I would credit him, but I can’t now find the reference–that if it were simply a matter of mathematical errors or inconsistencies, one would expect some models to err on the “hot side” and others on the “cold side” of actual observations. But that isn’t the case: all of the models run hot. That suggest that global warming alarmism is a political, not a scientific, movement.
Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.