5. Conclusions “Many people, especially ignorant people, want to punish you for speaking the truth, for being correct, for being you. Never apologize for being correct, or for being years ahead of your time. If you’re right and you know it, speak your mind. Speak your mind. Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is still the truth.” Mahatma Gandhi A climatologist is sort of a meteorologist (as they both use similar General Circulation Models 455) who has forgotten that no decent 15 days forecasts can be made but who has deluded him/her self into believing that he/she knows what the weather will be in a century456. This statement is not overly surprising as IPCC admitted in 2001 that «The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible», IPCC – 2001 – TAR-14 – «Advancing Our Understanding», p. 771. Since 2001, the state of art in underlying physics (Navier–Stokes equations457), discretization (by means of the finite difference method) and computing has not dramatically changed. Even if the computing power has increased significantly, let's remind why Gerlich and Tscheuschner (2009) dismissed climate models “It cannot be overemphasized that even if these equations are simplified considerably, one cannot determine numerical solutions, even for small space regions and even for small time intervals. This situation will not change in the next 1000 years regardless of the progress made in computer hardware”. Notwithstanding this evidence, AGW supporters will immediately claim that this is irrelevant, that climate is concerned with long term trends, etc. By saying that they just acknowledge that the core of their dogma naively relies on equating an increase of temperature to an increase of CO 2 and that they have completely forgotten what defines the Climate as per Köppen-Geiger458 (Köppen, 1884a-b, 1936; Kottek et al., 2006). Let's recall climate predictions require knowledge of precipitations that consists of the five main groups, i.e. A (tropical), B (dry), (temperate), D (continental), and E (polar) which are further divided into seasonal precipitation patterns, and temperature changes follow. But if no meteorological forecast is able to predict where the next major depression will be in 15 days, or hurricane or else, it also entails that beyond 15 days there is no solution to knowing where the precipitations will happen. There are of course very good reasons for that, which is that the most important component of the weather and climate, i.e. water and water vapor with clouds and complex cloud systems, are so complex and uncertain that computer climate models resort to crude representations based on “parametrization”. Convection, one of the major components of heat distribution in the atmosphere thanks to further change of state of water vapor, is so badly taken into account by climate models that it must be handled via parameters. Clouds are also typically handled using a parameter, for a similar reasons. Limited understanding of clouds has impaired the success of the models and has made them unable, as we have seen before, to just reproduce the climate (integral over time of the weather) back to the LIA. How could they forecast anything meaningful? Let's summarize a bit where we stand: As far as Physics is concerned: •
Arrhenius calculations were wrong and his conjecture is flawed: CO 2 only plays a marginal role in the climate system ;
455https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_circulation_model A general circulation model (GCM) is a type of climate model. It employs a mathematical model of the general circulation of a planetary atmosphere or ocean. GCMs and global climate models are used for weather forecasting, understanding the climate, and forecasting climate change. 456The classical delusion and deception is one such as expressed by Randall et al. (2007) “Note that the limitations in climate models’ ability to forecast weather beyond a few days do not limit their ability to predict long-term climate changes, as these are very different types of prediction”. In fact, multi-decadal climate predictions are claimed to be different types of prediction (i.e. called “boundary forced” as distinct from “initial value” problems), but, of course, they are also initial value predictions, as discussed in Pielke Sr. (1998) and Pielke Sr. et al. (1999). The predictability (as defined in geophysics) of these predictions is null. If an astronomer were to tell you that he does not know where an object will be in 10 days but that he knows where it will be in 20,000 years you would call him an astrologer, in our case you call him a “climatologist”. 457Navier-Stokes equations, a system of partial differential equations, were established in 1822 by French engineer Henri Navier with a seminal contribution by George Stokes. 458https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Köppen_climate_classification
379
