Reply #11: Not sure I get your point

[Nederland]

On Edit: I just noticed that your link "Climate Models: An Assessment of Strengths and Limitations" was published July 2008. Is that some sort of joke? Do you honestly believe that the accuracy of the IPCC AR4 2007 Report Climate Models can be accurately assessed in such a short time? Do you believe it is perfectly legitimate to look at a model whose computer runs took place in late 2006 and declare it "accurate" after only two years of observational data? Are you comfortable saying that because something looks pretty good after 2 years, we should spend hundreds of billions of dollars on the belief that they will be accurate for the next 98? If so, you have a rather low standard for what you call "proof".

Since you seem to have a problem with the words I chose to describe the differences between IPCC model predictions and subsequent observations, I'll just put up the graphs and let you qualify them anyway you want:

First CO2:



Actual CO2 is the solid line, IPCC prediction is the dashed line.

Next, temperature:



The blue line is NOAA observed temperatures, the pink line is the IPCC A1B prediction.

Finally sea level rise:



Annual observed sea level numbers in red, IPCC prediction are the dotted line.