Climate alarmists on the Left don’t want to hear it, and in fact want to punish – like, with fines and jail terms – anyone who disagrees with their claim that the world is burning up and your SUV is to blame. But in fact, some scientists are now claiming that their global warming modeling may have been all wrong.
Not that that should surprise us. A distinctly non-climatologist who has made tens of millions off “global warming” – former Vice President Al Gore – warned the world in 2008 that due to climate change, if we didn’t “do something” (which means high carbon taxes and reverting our technology and lifestyles back to the 1700s) by 2012, it would all be over.
Except, is isn’t. And now, we’re told, all of that climate change noise is very likely just that – noise.
Yeah, the models have been wrong
As reported by the UK’s Daily Mail, it isn’t that the climate doesn’t change – it does, and it always has – but the fluctuations in recent years are not going to automatically lead to more floods, droughts and other hostile dramatic weather conditions, according to Swedish researchers who have reconstructed the weather patterns of the past 1,200 years.
As the Daily Mail reported further:
Scientists used data collected from tree rings, marine sediments, ice cores and mineral deposits to examine the interaction between water and climate in the northern hemisphere over the centuries.
Using this to create a ‘spatial reconstruction of hydroclimate variability’, they found no evidence to support simulations that showed wet regions getting wetter and dry regions drier during the 20th century.
The Swedish scientist, Dr. Fredrik Charpentier Ljungqvist, a medieval historian and paleoclimatologist at Stockholm University, said that his research indicates a prominent seesaw pattern of alternating moisture periods that have been consistent over the past 12 centuries.
Weather and climate anomalies such as medieval “megadroughts” in the western U.S., as well as monsoon failures in east Asia from the 15th through the 19th centuries have taken place during the period, and are larger than anything recorded with modern instrumentation.
“This strongly suggests that the instrumental period is too short to capture the full range of natural hydroclimate variability,” Dr. Ljungqvist wrote in the journal Nature.
In comparing proxy data with climate models, Ljungqvist noted that there is widespread agreement from the 10th through the 18th centuries, however that broke down in the 19th and 20th centuries. He said that there were a number of possible explanations for that and for why climate models of today have not been accurate.
No evidence of warming
“The proxy evidence does not support the tendency in simulations for wet regions to become wetter and dry regions drier in a warmer climate,” Ljungqvist said.
His findings are in contrast with existing climate models, which generally show the hydrological cycle intensifying, with more extreme wet and dry spells during the last century.
What’s more, there is a lack of evidence that weather patterns predicting higher temperatures have actually occurred – a phenomenon we have noted here at NaturalNews.
That means that any warming in the 20th century was not extreme enough for the pattern to emerge, or that the triggers for the responsible mechanisms should be revised.
“The findings from the new study don’t disprove that the Earth’s climate is changing or that certain regions are experiencing more extreme localised climates – desertification or localised flooding – but they do question some of the modelling and simulations which have been used to link climate and the water cycle,” the Daily Mail reported.
Read original article here: lik