Are the Global Warming Models Wrong ?

Not only the models but all those pointing a finger at humans are wrong.

North American was mostly ice and got warm up. Who made it hotter, humans ? Every year we have a hot season and a cold season.

Every few thousand years we have an ice age and than a hot age. That just the way earth is . But some people can make a lot of money by scamming the public and nations. We can easily be fool, as evident by this pass election.

Yes, they are wrong. They had a theory that worked based on past data. But, they have failed predicting going forward. I have done the same thing with gambling and investing techniques. Created a theory that worked great going backwards, but failed going forward. Happens all the time in the real world. If they were right then our toposphere temperature would not be flat for the last 10 years. The sun is the major player, and we have always gone in cycles of global warming and global cooling. Climate change is real, always has been. In fact, we are about to enter a mini ice age in 2030. That will be far worse for us then this global warming stuff. Oh, a prior writer stated they are showing a good correlation. Not true. They keep tweaking the system to create a good correlation. I can do that too with my gambling and investment theories. But until my models work going forward without adjusting for current data, then, well, I won't make money and they suck. Of course, our current scientists actually make money even if their models have been a failure. Wish the market and vegas paid me like we pay them.

No, but they aren't totally right yet, either, which is why controversy exists. The slanted article you came across is part of the current political battle royal between Greens and business interests, neither of whom could care less about scientific truth and beauty.

The known scientific facts are rather brief. The current level of carbon dioxide is the highest seen in millions of years, going by geological evidence. The last time it was this high, things were very warm, and the icecaps melted, but the worldwide layout of the continents was different. Global average temperatures have been rising since at least the 1970's, though Alpine glaciers and such have been shrinking since the 1800's, and we know some natural cycle is involved, but we don't understand it yet. It is only in recent years that we have had data that has allowed us to determine precision temperature curves for the last 2 million years or so, and the science to explain them is still being worked out. I'm not even getting into ocean currents and the rest here.

Nobody can explain much of it yet, or solidly predict what's going to happen in terms of climate or sea level,

I do not dispute that man-made greenhouse gas emissions contribute to the planetary greenhouse effect. Before we do anything, however, I'd like to see the underlying science firmly quantified, so that we don't legislate ourselves into a glacial period or something.

Nope. There are people who have spent decades measuring, refining and comparing data with the models, so at this point the models are pretty good.

The folk who claim that global warming is a myth etc. are doing so out of political motivation, with nothing but loud voices to back them up.

you're able to desire to re-readd the article which you sited. What your asserting isn't what the article and scientific learn is asserting. particular the comments of the water vapor in the better ecosystem brought about much less warming than envisioned over the final ten years. So, fairly of .25 F upward thrust which became envisioned, it became a .18 F upward thrust. out of your article: yet Solomon factors out that is not an illustration that predictions on worldwide warming are overstated: "this does not recommend there is not worldwide warming," notes Solomon. "there is not any important debate that that is warmer now than it became one hundred years in the past, with the aid of anthropogenic (guy-made) greenhouse gases." and how will this water vapor impact destiny worldwide warming? "we actually don't be responsive to the answer to this," says Solomon. "If the water adjustments are with the aid of particular way the sea-floor temperature development looks perfect now, then it might desire to nicely not be correct to the final warming. it might desire to purely be a source of variability from one decade to a various with the aid of fact the sea development slowly adjustments. Or it might desire to be correct to the final warming of the tropics, wherein case it might desire to proceed to 'positioned the brakes on.' purely time will tell, and extra information." attempt to comprehend the technology Jello.

no, they are predictive models that so far show a good correlation with the observed data. There is serious cause for concern and an overwhelming majority of climatologists who understand the science are in full agreement