Saturday, October 22nd 2011, 7:57 PM EDT
Figure 1. Temperature predictions vs. observations as portrayed by Dana1981.
The October 18, 2011 post on Skeptical Science entitled “How Global Temperatures Predictions Compare to What Happened (Skeptics Off Target)” http://www.skepticalscience.com/news.php?n=1055 by ‘Dana 1981’ claimed that “the IPCC projections have thus far been the most accurate” and “mainstream climate science predictions ….. have mostly done well …….. and the “skeptics” have generally done rather poorly.” ““several skeptics basically failed, while leading scientists such as Dr. James Hansen (a regular climate activist, as well as the top climatologist at NASA) and those at the IPCC did pretty darn well.” Figure 1 shows a graphical comparison of predictions vs. observations as portrayed by Dana1981.
However, the graph and these statements seemed to fly in the face of data, which show just the opposite—that computer models have failed badly in predicting temperatures over the past decade. So how could anyone make these claims? Figure 2 shows the IPCC temperature predictions from 2000 to 2011, taken from the IPCC website in 2000. Note that their projection is for warming of 0.6ºC (1.1ºF) between 2003 and now.
Click source to download PDF and read FULL report from Don Easterbrook