concentrations from pre-industrial levels will result in warming above 5 °C, for example. This was not the case in previous generations of simpler models.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change , to its credit, has recognized this ‘hot model’ problem. Scientists contributing to the main sections of its Sixth Assessment Report reconciled the newest climate models with key observational constraints on global mean warming, sea-level rise and ocean heat content, and other analyses. They applied statistics to determine the most reasonable projections, consistent with many lines of evidence, which they call ‘assessed warming’.
Studies that cover monthly or daily extremes or regional climate impacts, for example, are instead left to use the full set of CMIP6 models. And simply taking an average of those leads to higher projections of warming than the IPCC’s assessed-warming averages. As a result, some studies have reported projections that might be inconsistent with AR6 assessments. Findings that show projected climate change will be ‘worse than we thought’ are often attributable to the hot models in CMIP6.
That venerable and kind Sir, Dr. Dyson, was right after all. How long it will take for admitting that Climate modelers took the wrong path?
I dearly hope the 'hot models' are wrong. That hope is muted by my understanding is that past IPCC reports have systematically erred on the conservative side.
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: Nature - 🏆 64. / 68 Read more »
Source: Eater - 🏆 368. / 59 Read more »
Source: NYMag - 🏆 111. / 63 Read more »
Source: SPIN - 🏆 258. / 63 Read more »
Source: Forbes - 🏆 394. / 53 Read more »
Source: latimes - 🏆 11. / 82 Read more »