2011-06-25 10:26:31Lessons from Past Climate Predictions Series
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
71.137.108.93

As discussed in a few of the forums here, we're going to do a series evaluating past climate predictions from both "sides".  I've done Lindzen and Hansen and McLean previously, and have a post on Easterbrook up on the blog post forum for review.  I'm trying to keep track of all the various predictions we can evaluate.

If you're interested in doing a post evaluating these predictions or any others (it doesn't have to be a temp prediction, i.e. Goddard and Watts on sea ice), or if you know of any not listed, post a comment here.

2011-06-25 10:37:23
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
71.137.108.93

One problem is that some of these predictions are too recent to evaluate yet, like Joe the Actuary, Cheetham, Michaels, and IPCC AR4.  Still plenty to choose from though.

2011-06-25 12:14:28Re Bob Carter
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.9.229

Ideally, is best if we can get visual predictions so we can visually superimpose observations over their faulty prediction. So hopefully we can track down Bob Carter's old sinusoid graphs where he predicts upcoming cooling.

2011-06-25 15:40:35FAR, SAR, and TAR projections
James Wight

jameswight@southernphone.com...
112.213.168.63

The first chapter of AR4 compares the IPCC’s projections to observations up to 2005. At that time temperatures were trending at the upper range of TAR projections; now they are more in the middle of the range.

2011-06-25 16:21:14Comparing IPCC predictions
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.9.229
Would be good to do the IPCC but he'll, that's a crappy graph from the IPCC. I reckon we can do better than that. I'd probably structure it as a story - show the FAR prediction versus observations, then discuss what was different in SAR and how it compares, then FAR, then AR4. use it as an example of how science works by reducing uncertaincy, increasing our understanding but that generally, the IPCC consensus view has been on the money. I'm sure there are other valuable lessons from the IPCC predictions also.
2011-06-25 23:36:59Right on!
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
98.122.98.161

Once again, John Cook has hit the nail squarely on the head!

2011-06-26 01:28:24
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
71.137.108.93
For the IPCC, what I'd like to find are the actual data files so we can focus on the scenarios which have actually come to fruition [i.e. scenario A2 so far]. Haven't been able to track the data down for them yet though. I was able to find the CO2 emissions for the various scenarios earlier. I imagine the temp data must be available somewhere.
2011-06-26 03:58:43
Riccardo

riccardoreitano@tiscali...
93.147.82.166

They should be archived here.

2011-06-29 03:20:34
Ari Jokimäki

arijmaki@yahoo...
91.154.101.47

One possible paper for this series is Kellogg (1979). Other possible papers might be found here, but I didn't go through them yet in this sense.

2011-06-29 03:33:23
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
64.129.227.4

oooh yeah that's a good one Ari.  I'd never seen that before.  It would be good to do the good projections chronologically - Kellogg, then Hansen, then IPCC FAR, SAR, TAR, AR4, with other relevant papers interspersed in between.  Just published Easterbrook, and I think I'll do Akasofu next, then maybe move on to the good ones.   Broecker (1975) is another good one.

Again, if anybody else wants to do a post on any of these, please do!  Riccardo already digitized the IPCC projections for me (all four), so I can pass along the Excel files if anybody wants to do those.  But we should start out with the earlier ones first (i.e. Broecker and Kellogg and any other good ones in the 1970s).

2011-07-04 09:53:02check out Broecker
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
71.140.0.15

Thought you guys might enjoy this.  This is Wallace Broecker in 1975 predicting the 2010 global temperature anomaly better than Don Easterbrook did in December 2008.

broecker zoomed

Easterbrook zoomed

Not too shabby for 1975, I'd say.

2011-07-04 21:40:15
Riccardo

riccardoreitano@tiscali...
192.84.150.209

Yes, and guess where the difference is :)

Though, do not forget that Broeker's projection has a cycle too. From an historical perspective, it has been difficult to put cycles aside, the sun has cycles afterall.

2011-07-05 00:15:40
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
71.140.0.15
Yeah, Broecker's cycle was really just an attempt to make the model fit the data reasonably well. I'll discuss that in the post. I mean it was 1975, so undestanding of the climate was still quite limited. Yet he did very well in his prediction anyway, which goes to show how dominant CO2 has been.