And no, I am not being sarcastic.
It’s just that (finally!) there is a RC claim that can be compared to the real world; next to it, a good dose of outright sincerity (surely it must have been there before, perhaps buried in the polemic…)
From What the IPCC models really say (May 12, 2008):
- Claims that GCMs project monotonic rises in temperature with increasing greenhouse gases are not valid. Natural variability does not disappear because there is a long term trend. The ensemble mean is monotonically increasing in the absence of large volcanoes, but this is the forced component of climate change, not a single realisation or anything that could happen in the real world.
- Over a twenty year period, you would be on stronger ground in arguing that a negative trend would be outside the 95% confidence limits of the expected trend (the one model run in the above ensemble suggests that would only happen ~2% of the time).
Note that even the fabled 20-year negative trend may still be interpreted as consistent with at least one model run.
But it’s a good step in the right direction: bringing back climate science from its forcings cage to the actual world…