| Agree |
|
There is considerable confidence that climate models provide credible quantitative estimates of future climate change, particularly at continental scales and above. This confidence comes from the foundation of the models in accepted physical principles and from their ability to reproduce observed features of current climate and past climate changes. ... models have consistently provided a robust and unambiguous picture of significant climate warming in response to increasing greenhouse gases.
|
| Mostly Disagree |
|
[Models can be misleading, because] underlying assumptions can completely predetermine the results of the model. If the major climate models that are having a major impact on public policy were documented and put in the public domain, other qualified professionals around the world would be interested in looking into the validity of these models. Right now, climate science is a black box that is highly questionable with unstated assumptions and model inputs.
|
| Mostly Disagree |
|
This paper provides further evidence that the multi-decadal global climate models are significantly overstating the water vapor input into the atmosphere, and thus are not providing quantitatively realistic estimates of how the climate system responds to the increase in atmospheric well mixed greenhouse gases in terms of the water vapor feedback. This water vapor feedback is required in order to achieve the amount of warming from radiative forcing projected in the 2007 IPCC report.
|
| Disagree |
|
Global warming theory and GCMs (General Circulation Models) are found to be fundamentally flawed. A significant, if not dominant portion of temperature increases in recent decades has resulted from local surface heating processes due to land use change, urbanization, and even anthropogenic greenhouse gases.
|
| Disagree |
|
The SPM [IPCC Summary for Policymakers] conceals that the methane concentration in the atmosphere has been stable for seven years (and nobody knows exactly why); not one climatic model foresaw this.
|
| Disagree |
|
There is of course much more wrong with state-of-the-art global circulation models (climate models) than the assumption and implementation of CO2-H2O feedback. Although these models are among the most elaborate predictive models of complex non-linear phenomena, they are nonetheless sweeping oversimplifications of the global climate system and its mechanistic intricacies.
|
| Disagree |
|
With the complete discrediting of the ‘hockey stick’ curve of recent temperature change (McIntyre and McKitrick, 2003, 2005; Wegman, Scott and Said, 2006) that was the icon of their report, the IPCC case for dangerous human-caused warming now rests only on ambiguous anecdotal evidence, unvalidated computer models and misleading attribution studies (IPCC, 2007).
|