The Greatest Climate Myths of All – Part 2.

WUWT
Director emeritus Sierra Nevada Field Campus, San Francisco State University and author of Landscapes & Cycles: An Environmentalist’s Journey to Climate Skepticism
In part one, I wrote “In the simplest of terms, every study that has attributed the recent warming of the 1980s and 90s to rising CO₂ has been based on the difference between their models’ reconstruction of “natural climate change” with their models’ output of “natural climate change plus CO₂.” However the persistent failure of their models to reproduce how “natural climate changed before,” means any attribution of warming due to CO₂ is at best unreliable and at worse a graphic fairy tale.”

Like failed modeling results illustrated in Part 1, scientists at the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit published Attribution Of Polar Warming To Human Influence¹. Again their models failed to account for the heat during Arctic’s earlier natural warming (black line), a warming climate scientists called “the most spectacular event of the century”. Their “natural models” grossly underestimated the 40s peak warming by ~0.8° C (blue line) and when CO₂ and sulfates were added the warming event was cooled further (red line). So how much do we trust models’ attribution when they get climate change half wrong?  ...."