Look at these charts that show correlation.
So, there you are. You have seen it all now. See how easy It is to make correlations.
BUT WAIT, I forgot to show you the most important one of all. It’s shows how actual measured global temperatures correlates with the global temperature forecasts made by the climate models that the catastrophic man-made global warming (CMNGW) scientists use.
Oh my. There doesn’t seem to be any correlation. What is a skeptic to believe?
Well, it seems that a new study by some of these warmers tells us that we should not believe the above chart because they have discovered the computer predictions were wrong. They say that they ran too hot.
At last, these warmers acknowledge what we skeptics have been telling them for the past 10+ years. They will probably will get a lot of nasty tweets from their warmer brethren, however, even though they say only a 0.4C reduction is needed. It looks like the difference over time is bound to be much greater.
The IPCC’s last major report, hinted they were overstating future temperatures, but they would not actually commit to a number.
You can get additional info on this from Paul Homewood’s posting: “Climate change not as threatening to the planet as previously thought, new research suggests”. From his posting, he notes the following:
I have a number of thoughts about this:
1) We have known for several years that the climate models have been running far too hot.
This rather belated admission is welcome, but a cynic would wonder why it was not made before Paris.
2) I suspect part of the motivation is to keep Paris on track. Most observers, including even James Hansen, have realised that it was not worth the paper it was written on.
This new study is designed to restore the belief that the original climate targets can be achieved, via Paris and beyond.
3) Although they talk of the difference between 0.9C and 1.3C, the significance is much greater.
Making the reasonable assumption that a significant part of the warming since the mid 19thC is natural, this means that any AGW signal is much less than previously thought.
4) Given that that they now admit they have got it so wrong, why should we be expected to have any faith at all in the models?
5) Finally, we must remember that temperatures since 2000 have been artificially raised by the recent record El Nino, and the ongoing warm phase of the AMO.
Given the latest admission, there is every likelihood that global temperatures will remain flat for a good time to come.
The first 4 charts are from “Spurious Correlations by Tyler Vigen. To get more laughs, go to his website which you can reach by clicking here.