To: Wharf Rat who wrote (1438988 ) 2/13/2024 10:16:17 AM From: Sdgla Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1579922 More spotlight on your lies ENERGYANALYSIS Climate Models Exaggerate Effects of Global Warming Policies to reduce carbon dioxide emissions to minimize the effects of climate change should be guided by the best available science. A new research paper from The Heritage Foundation provides compelling evidence—as indicated in the chart below—that warming in the past 50 years or so has been overestimated by most computer models when compared to temperature observations by thermometer. The Heritage Foundation’s Backgrounder paper, written by the first author of this commentary, is titled “ Global Warming: Observations vs. Climate Models .” (The Daily Signal is Heritage’s news outlet.) A vocal minority of scientists often criticizes work such as this paper because their careers depend upon continued climate alarmism. For example, NASA’s Gavin Schmidt, a mathematician by training who now oversees a subset of the climate models at the Goddard Institute for Space Studies, took issue with a few of the Heritage paper’s arguments, to which the author responded in detail here and here . >>> Read the entire Heritage Backgrounder here . So, how well do climate models predict the warming that actually has occurred? Let’s look at trends in surface air temperature, averaged over the United States since 1945. Why 1945? For two reasons. First, CO2 emissions began to dramatically increase after World War II. Second, when one compares the future warming response in 33 computer models to a doubling of atmospheric CO2above preindustrial levels (called “2x CO2“), 1945 is the starting year that produces the highest correlation between those warming trends and the eventual total amount of global-average warming in response to 2xCO2. In other words, 1945 is the starting date when computer models’ past warming trends best predict future rates of global warming. The distribution of those past model trends is shown here: