RegGuheert wrote:But you guys don't seem to care about the complete inability of the current models to make accurate predictions.
Accurate and meaningful are two different things.
The exact is the enemy of the good enough.Climate models have been good enough for a long time.
Climate models can be, and have been tested by comparing with past climates: such as the peak of the last ice advance. CO2 level less than half of today's 407 PPM in climate models predicts a much colder climate, cold enough for glaciers reaching New York. CO2 level about four times today's 407 PPM was present in the Early Eocene, but climate models don't do as well then. The climate models tend to get the Early Eocene Equatorial areas too hot, and/or the polar areas too cold. So yes, the models are not exact. Burning all the fossil fuels gets us to a warmer climate than the Early Eocene, due to solar brightening and a higher CO2 level. We don't need a climate model to find out what happens next. We look at what happened the last time. The Arctic was about as warm in summer as Florida is today. Florida was someplace around the lethal for vertebrates (fish, birds, reptiles and mammals) temperature of 40C dew point.
The Eocene polar areas can be best described by looking at fossils from the Canadian Arctic. About as close to the North Pole as there is land. Currently barely gets above freezing in summer. But in the Eocene, and other past hot, high CO2 periods, was about 10C in winter, and 30C in summer.
For example this:https://www.jstor.org/stable/40510749?s ... b_contents
Full text is at:http://hdl.handle.net/10515/sy5fj29g9
The remains of a fossil forest are buried within a sedimentary sequence of Eocene age (approximately 50 million years old) near Strathcona Fiord, Ellesmere Island. Large petrified tree stumps are preserved in their original growth positions in coals of the Eureka Sound Group, a sequence of sandstones, siltstones and coals deposited in a delta/floodplain environment. The dimensions of 83 stumps were recorded and their positions plotted on a plan of the exposed area of coal. The fossil stumps are roughly conical in shape, up to 1.8 m high and with roots spreading up to 5 m in diameter. They are closely spaced on the coal, some only 1 m apart. A density of 1 stump in 27 m^2 (367 stumps Ha^-1) was calculated for this forest. The stumps represent large forest trees that grew in freshwater, swampy conditions between large river channels. Their buttressed roots provided extra support in the waterlogged peats. The rivers periodically shifted their courses, flooding the forests and burying them under silts and sands. Wide growth rings in the fossil wood, in addition to evidence from associated sediments and vertebrate faunas, indicate favourable growing conditions in a mild, cool/warm temperate climate with high rainfall. Palaeolatitude studies suggest that the forest lay close to its present high-latitude position during the Eocene. Such a forest is therefore evidence that the Eocene polar climate was much warmer than today and that the trees were able to tolerate a polar sunlight regime of continuous summer sunlight followed by months of winter darkness.