If you didn't find what you were looking for, try a new search!
More than 70 percent of climate models underestimated the amount of rain compared to real world observations.
Satellite observations continue to reveal the climate computer model epic fail. Can climate science be both settled and wrong at the same time?
Climate models show twice as much warming during the 21st Century than what’s actually been observed, according to a new report highlighting the limitations of global climate models
Computer models that have been over-predicting global warming for at least six decades.
Newly "adjusted" satellite-derived temperature data shows much more warming in the bulk atmosphere than previous data, but shows the Earth’s atmosphere is still cooler than most climate models projected.
Climate models used by scientists to predict how much human activities will warm the planet have been over-predicting global warming for the last six decades, according to a recent working paper by climate scientists.
Global temperatures have remained steady for almost 19 years, the United States has not been hit by a Category 3, 4 or 5 hurricane since 2005, total polar ice is increasing, not melting, and seas are rising at barely seven inches per century.
Dr. Roy Spencer shows that 96.7% of climate computer models warm faster than actual observations of world temperature.
Green, Armstrong, and Soon, authors of the only peer-reviewed paper that claims to provide scientific forecasts of long-range global mean temperatures, explain that the IPCC climate forecasting modelers violated 72 of 89 relevant scientific forecasting principles to reach their politically mandated conclusions -- conclusions that are the supposed basis for very costly regulations that stifle growth and burden the future.
To bolster their charge the earth is heating up, global warming advocates point to computer models they say validate their alarmist claims. But are these models accurate?