Dedicated to the balanced discussion of global warming
Ohio State University – February 15, 2007
This is an extremely strong article that basically says the models that some scientists are using to predict doom and gloom are not complete or not correct. Interesting that this report comes out only days after IPCC report gave a 90% chance that humans are causing global warming.
I don’t understand how he can say that the models are not exact and then the global population is supposed to take these same models, assume the sky is falling, and spend billions of dollars trying to correct it.
Antarctica, arctic, climate models, Europe, IPCC, polar, prediction, scientists, temperature, weather
“It’s hard to see a global warming signal from the mainland of Antarctica right now,” he said. “Part of the reason is that there is a lot of variability there. It’s very hard in these polar latitudes to demonstrate a global warming signal. This is in marked contrast to the northern tip of the Antarctic Peninsula that is one of the most rapidly warming parts of the Earth.”
Bromwich says that the problem rises from several complications. The continent is vast, as large as the United States and Mexico combined. Only a small amount of detailed data is available – there are perhaps only 100 weather stations on that continent compared to the thousands spread across the U.S. and Europe . And the records that we have only date back a half-century.
“The best we can say right now is that the climate models are somewhat inconsistent with the evidence that we have for the last 50 years from continental Antarctica .
“We’re looking for a small signal that represents the impact of human activity and it is hard to find it at the moment,” he said.
“It isn’t surprising that these models are not doing as well in these remote parts of the world. These are global models and shouldn’t be expected to be equally exact for all locations,” he said.