Again Reality Goes In Opposite Direction Of Climate Models…”Confidence In Models Correspondingly Low”

Yesterday we posted on how rainfall across southern Europe has risen over the past couple of decades, thus going in the opposite direction of what was projected by climate models. And once again the models are shown to be woefully faulty and an unreliable tool for policymaking, as the following example shows.

Southern Africa vegetation expanding, images show. Source: here.

Real vegetation development in southern Africa takes a very different course than claimed by climate models

By Die kalte Sonne
(German translated by P Gosselin)

Climate models provide answers to all conceivable questions about the future. Political decision-makers are grateful for this information because they can make their plans accordingly.

But are the forecasts derived from models correct at all?

A research team led by Timm Hoffman has now compared the model projections with real vegetation development in southern Africa using historical photos. The sobering result: Nature has mostly developed quite differently than assumed by the models. In contrast to the model assumptions, no significant long-term trend in precipitation could be observed. Vegetation belts, which were supposed to shrink, ended up expanding. Confidence in the models is correspondingly low.

Political planning or even CO2 damage calculations based on the simulations are not possible. Here is the abstract of the work published in the journal Anthropocene in March 2019:

Rethinking catastrophe? Historical trajectories and modelled future vegetation change in southern Africa
Most projections of climate change for southern Africa describe a hotter and drier future with catastrophic consequences for the environment and socio-ecological sustainability of the region. This study investigated whether evidence of the projections for the climate and vegetation of the subcontinent is already evident. Analysis of the climate record indicate that the historical trend of increasing temperature is consistent with future projections for the region. Rainfall, however, apparently has not changed significantly. Results from analysis of 1321 repeat historical photographs indicate broad trends in vegetation trajectories in the major biomes of southern Africa. The Savanna biome has experienced a rapid increase in woody plant at rates un-anticipated by the models. Contrary to early projections for the Succulent Karoo biome, biomass and cover have increased, largely in response to changes in land-use practices. Cover in the fire-adapted Fynbos biome has remained stable or increased over time with unanticipated expansion of forest species, particularly in localities protected from fire for long periods. The shrub-dominated Nama-karoo biome has increased in grass cover. Rather than contracting, as suggested in the early models, the Grassland biome has apparently expanded westwards into former Nama-karoo biome sites. The Savanna biome has experienced a rapid increase in woody plants at rates not anticipated by the models. The broad trends in historical trajectories illustrate how land-use management has influenced vegetation change in the past. They also provide a useful context for evaluating future changes and developing mitigation strategies for some of the worst impacts of climate change in the future.”

6 responses to “Again Reality Goes In Opposite Direction Of Climate Models…”Confidence In Models Correspondingly Low””

  1. tom0mason

    CO2 is doing its job of greening the planet, and not putting all life in jeopardy as the (balmy) cAGW advocated would have us believe. Now yet again, this report shows a small increase in this rare atmospheric CO2 has cause quite a large increase in the greening of the planet.

    So is it theoretical ‘CO2 Armageddon!’, or are we just heading towards a more lush, green and pleasant planet as CO2 probably rises to 0.06% or even 0.08% of the atmosphere.
    Increases in atmospheric CO2 thus far has certainly not shown any ability to change the climate despite what the deranged cAGW advocates blather on about. There is NO evidence of a CO2/climate “mechanism” — that is just imaginative bunkum!

  2. dennisambler

    You know where they are coming from when they call the journal “The Anthropocene”, which of course is a non-existant epoch, but is used as a propaganda term. If even they have to admit the greening of the earth, then it surely is significant.

  3. ScienceABC123

    I get the impression that somewhere in all those climate models there is a “sign error.”

  4. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #354 | Watts Up With That?
  5. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #354 – Enjeux énergies et environnement
  6. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #354 - Sciencetells

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy