It occurs to me to wonder whether this error in the GISS-E2-R ocean mixing parameterisation, which gave rise to AMOC instability in the Pliocene simulation, might possibly account for the model’s behaviour in LU run 1. It looks to me as if something goes seriously wrong with the AMOC in the middle of the 20th century in that run, with no subsequent recovery evident.
But let’s make wealth-destroying policy based on this!
[Update on January 28th]
Insights from Karl Popper to break the gridlock in the climate debate.
It’s sad how so many people who (ironically) accuse me of being a “climate denier” or a “science denier” are so profoundly ignorant of how science actually works.
[Update a while later]
An analysis from Judith Curry and Nic Lewis on the latest climate crap from Mann et al:
As I see it, this paper is a giant exercise in circular reasoning:
- Assume that the global surface temperature estimates are accurate; ignore the differences with the satellite atmospheric temperatures
- Assume that the CMIP5 multi-model ensemble can be used to accurately portray probabilities
- Assume that the CMIP5 models adequately simulate internal variability
- Assume that external forcing data is sufficiently certain
- Assume that the climate models are correct in explaining essentially 100% of the recent warming from CO2
In order for Mann et al.’s analysis to work, you have to buy each of these 5 assumptions; each of these is questionable to varying degrees.
You don’t say.