Content uploaded by Kesten Green
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Kesten Green on Jun 27, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
Do Forecasters of Dangerous
Manmade Global Warming
Follow the Science?
ournal of Forecasting and the International Journal of
Forecasting
!"#$%&
'()
*'+
,
-!!./+
000/%0
International Symposium on Forecasting
1'#2!"#2
'%// +
How to benet from this
presentation
)/
3
/%
%%
/%
/%4
),/
!
Al Gore’s forecast in 2007
56/+
Assault on Reason 7
!""$89
:;%%%
‘tipping
points’ %#"
,impossible
irretrievabledamage to the planet’s
habitability<=
!""$>/<%7
%)''8
?
Re'ect...
@
•3/
7'8
!""$AAAA
•(%4
/
AAA
/B,
AA
Armstrong’s 10-year bet with
Mr. Gore
C
+/complex situation %high
uncertainty
Mr. Gore and the
IPCC’s forecast Armstrong’s
forecast
:=?°'--
%
5/D
-,9
3D
>-!#
'
'%
and)''E
7
+ 5
8
Do those favoring the global
warming hypothesis follow the
science?
;D/
DNew
York Times
:%=
H
..,
%.
One minute is too long and one day is too
short for this task. We spent months on it
2
Dening the scientic method
.
9
# /
! /.,%
? /
@ /
C /
F D7/.H8
$ -
2 78
./
!@
D.
I
Rating compliance to the
scientic method
#H,
%,%
%
!H9:
/=
?G/9
:MR/H
T=7; (8
•
•HJ
#"
Who should use the ratings?
/9
1. Researchers%.
%
2. Universities
.
3. FundersH.
4. Scientic journals/
.
5. Managers<
6. Courts
7. News media..,
/
..
8. Government regulators
##
Who should make the
ratings?
1. Researchers,%
../
.
2. Journals
,%
//
?"
3. Courts
.
#!
Are compliance ratings
reliable?
•,%
D-/
$,
• %/
!C
•%
%
complied with science9
>
/ KF
K2 #?
Are there published long-term forecasts of global
warming that comply with the scientic method?
)'',.
/
)'':long-term prediction of future
climate states is not possible.=
L
•%%scienti%c
•:=78/
DEopinions
B3LScenarios/
/
%.7
%8 #@
Compliance with science
ratings
/independent
%.
9
•D7%J
8
•
#C
Compliance with science: Mean
temperatures
Expert opinion
forecast a
Forecast by
experts on
forecasting
methods b
DE "M2 2M2
E "M2 FM2
'D
"M2 $CM2
#F
!""$)''/%
/+N7!""I8
FD%
)''@
+NE7!""I8
%%
.
78
Ex ante forecast validity
%+N7!""I8
)''D
%<
•5<##"%
#@C-
•5<I##""
%#!F
D.
/D
7%.-
/
;
8
#$
Compliance with science: polar
bears
Four climate experts "M2
Three research
assistants !M2
Consensus of seven
raters "M2
#2
Link to USGS report:+
5
1&G
$D
%+/%
%.
78
Polar bear policy and the scientic
method
+/
.9
/9
•:+5
1&G=
G%O
•
/
•,
:%=
.
!""$
%
#I
No need to believe our ratings
B9
•''!""$91
;,
7)''/8
•6''5/
G;,
7#""--/+
8
•5 -%1
!#
P'
(9
7/-,
-8
!"
+
78
+
7G58
The three-legged stool for
climate policy
&H.9
# /-/
! Q
? /.
5H
No scienti%c forecasts support any leg.
!#
Conclusions
# ,D
identify scienti%c forecasts/%
/%
%/unable.
H
! 3D
D/D
.
? 1,%
comply with the scienti%c method
no dangerous long-term trend/
!!
Additional Materials:
/
-,
5%:=
'%
-
3-/,
!?
Additional tests of
global warming forecasting
procedures
# 57
,8
! + 5
? KE <7D
8
!@
1. Application of the Forecasting
Audit to
global mean temperatures
5H,%
-/
/+N
)'':/=/
9
6$!2I
7:'
/=:5
=8
-/
//
4
!C
2. Golden Rule of
Forecasting:
“Be Conservative,” or
:5%
=
1/
cumulative knowledge/9
#
!-/
:+ 5=
:=
!F
When to be
conservative
All/L
especially%9
# 'D
!
? /9
–/
–
!$
Golden Rule of Forecasting
Checklist
Procedure: 1%!2
/
/<
# GQ%%+
#"I%
!
/?#R$"
Q<
:+ 5',=!2
Golden Rule applied to IPCC
scenarios
+ 5',%
)'':/=-
'/+
!"+ ',
9
S )''%none
S -%95%
#2C#-#I$C
C2<
I##""
7;38-C"-
<%"!@T'
3)''"?T'%--
%#!F-
!I
The “Precautionary Principle”
violates the Golden Rule of
Forecasting
/%
:=
%7
/
8H
.
+K%E
Nineteen Eighty-Four
?"
3. Occam’s Razor
H/
9
#
!,%
?
@
%Qcomplexity
/7?!
%I$89
a) NoneD
/8 'D/!$R
:D9=%
/!"#C
?#
Simple Forecasting Checklist
ratings:
IPCC projections vs. no-change
forecasts
Our Average Compliance Ratings 7R
8
)'' >'
#I IF
//
Do you own and send us your ratings and reasons!
L
#2C#-#I$C
C2<I#
#"")''%
#!F
- ?!
Warming alarmists do not forecast,
they create “scenarios” to use in
computer simulations
#
/%%
%=
a. BiasedL
7+NG!""#8
! /D
DE
/%%
D/
-DE9
-,
/ ,E!"-D
?@
Two additional scientic forecast
s of long-term global mean tempera
tures (2014)
9
%
#.%
/!""$
!)-
%
?.<D
?C