Scientists determine that there is no discrepancy between climate model predictions and tropical troposphere temperature records
PhysOrg.com reports that a team of scientists led by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory has “helped reconcile the differences between simulated and observed temperature trends in the tropics.”
“Using state-of-the-art observational datasets and results from computer model simulations archived at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, LLNL researchers and colleagues from 11 other scientific institutions have refuted a recent claim that simulated temperature trends in the tropics are fundamentally inconsistent with observations. This claim was based on the application of a flawed statistical test and the use of older observational datasets.
“Until several years ago, however, most satellite and weather balloon records suggested that the tropical troposphere had warmed substantially less than the surface.
“For nearly a decade, this apparent discrepancy between simulations and reality was a major conundrum for climate scientists. The discrepancy was at odds with the overwhelming body of other scientific evidence pointing toward a “discernible human influence” on global climate.
“A paper published online last year in the International Journal of Climatology claimed to show definitively that “models and observations disagree to a statistically significant extent” in terms of their tropical temperature trends. This claim formed the starting point for an investigation by a large team of climate modelers and observational data specialists, which was led by LLNL’s Benjamin Santer.
“In marked contrast to the earlier claim, Santer’s international team found that there is no fundamental discrepancy between modeled and observed trends in tropical temperatures.”
(emphasis added)
crf, thanks for your comments, too. Perhaps you can add a little meat next time, rather than a simple dismissal of another commenter?
R W, thanks for commenting. Does Exxon pay its scientists (two of whom sit on IPCC panels) to agree with the IPCC summaries? Why? And do China, India and Brazil also pay its scientists to agree with the IPCC? Why? What about all of the other corporations that agree with the IPCC? Is it all a conspiracy by scientists, corporations and governments around the world to fall unfer the thumb of anonymous super-regulators at the UN?
“Paid scientists say what hey are paid to say”
Your freely offered comments are less than worthless.
Paid scientists say what hey are paid to say…..they wish to keep their jobs. How can modelers and data miners,, not a single actual atmospheric scientist among them. Amazing hey made their computers agree with their computers, all without having to deal with the messy real world.