The Pickering Post
Monday, 18th February 2019

If you would like to be involved or support the upkeep and further development of this site, it would be very welcome no matter how small.

Carbon-centric Climate Models fail Consistently

Viv Forbes

Viv has a degree in Applied Science Geology and is a Fellow of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy


In 2007 a computer model predicted that the Arctic would be free of ice by 2013. But in 2013, Arctic ice was abundant.

Two years ago the massive UK government computer model predicted that “drought was the new normal”. And a recent UK Met Office forecast was that this winter would be drier than normal. Just two months later, the UK suffered huge floods.

Here in Australia, former Climate Commissioner Flannery is famed for his frequent failed forecasts on droughts and sea levels.

The Gore Effect is equally infamous – it produces snow wherever Big Al delivers another sermon on the fire and brimstone that awaits us if the wicked world keeps using demon carbon fuels.

There is no measurable evidence that carbon dioxide (CO2) controls global warming. In fact it may be the reverse – ocean temperature controls atmospheric CO2. We know that the massive oceans do slowly expel and absorb CO2 as water temperature rises and falls. Moreover, all five global temperature datasets show zero global warming since 1997 despite an increase of at least 40% in man’s CO2 emissions during that period.

All western governments have done massive damage to their economies and their electricity generators and consumers by putting their faith in computer models based on one fragile assumption – that future global temperatures are determined mainly by the miniscule levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. They compound this error by assuming that water vapour feedback will multiply any warming effect from carbon dioxide. In fact, water probably plays a negative temperature-moderating role.

Fed with false input assumptions of ever-rising carbon dioxide and magnified with positive water feedbacks, the models naturally produce output forecasts with a chronic warm bias, all of which have proved wrong. Garbage in, garbage out.

Honest weather forecasters never claim reliability beyond a few days. To believe that a mechanistic computer model can produce useful predictions for decades ahead shows that zealotry has replaced scientific prudence in too many circles.

Climate variables never continue along straight-line trends – all are affected by cycles and oscillations in Earth’s orbit, sun-spots, cosmic rays, ocean currents, cloud cover, volcanic activity and the solar system. Practical forecasters have long recognised these cyclic influences, and some show skill in projecting them.

The sun is the chief driver of Earth’s climate oscillations, and it is now in a quiet phase. It is time to reject the failed projections of carbon-centric climate models, restore our battered economies and prepare our infrastructure for whatever surprises the real climate has in store.


Avatar was not my choice .It`s not right that someone can choose other peoples avatars ?? That is unprincipled.I don`t approve of whoever did that .At least the webmaster knows that I had no part in that , if it is someones copyright `image`.How insulting?

Al Bore has maybe forgotten to visit NYC - today the Hudson River froze, again. Must be global warming, eh Al?????

As far as I know they would need (1826-75) R.C Carrington`s Notes on solar activity as a cross reference for comparison at least and poles surveying for distances archived also.But their equations don`t seem right without how they calculated that change either if they do not spell it out.

lighter I meant.It requires more info the source you mention (kindly meant).They need to offer us the way they equated that.Based on the 0.34 of Earth and the stages.. Yrs periods and areas exactly, and then that needs cross referencing with weather specific stats and archives and pictures even where aplicable and the actual sun activity at those times also.

On a lighte note the lava oceans and magnetic fields also contribute `ions` wise in a nth sth pattern of a polar trend which is historically known, and plays a dynamic role.So I would rather factor all that in rather than just reflection/ absorption from one pole.

Either way the distances and temps on other planets are comparative and have existed for longer than we know, so I don`t believe the reflection . absorption ,theory as a cause based on a mere 30 ? yrs researchm when other more real considerations are factored in.Halides of isotopes, Nitrates concentration in the Arctic zones , and manufactured waste dumped after chemical alteration etc.

Albedoes on Earth is O.34 compared to other planets distance wise .. there are other factors that may well influence temperatures,Eg Mercury close to sun is 0.06 Moon = 0.07 Even Pluto`s was /is 0.16 Venus 0.61.. Earth has a unique atmosphere cooled by 70% ocean.More likely if Arctic area is warming it is either cyclic or perhaps the dumping of toxic waste and drill bombing in areas of Aleutian Islands may well contribute being radical.

Perhaps all the Arctic ice moved South to the Antarctic and that was why the ship of fools got stuck?

Andrew Bolt has been commenting for over 12 months on the Flannery climate joke! Andrew has been diligent and correct throughout the whole saga of "false" climate change reports. Flannery is an absolute joke.

Krauthammer’s “Climate Change” Piece Exposes The Fascism Of The Warmists

It is just over a year since we saw this BS press conference by Labor. I recall it was spin to coincide with a Labor cockup?

..... another model to join all the other failed models. I think some of these researchers should go to the arctic in winter. Guys it is bloody dark and freezing. I read a more believable theory about climate change last week. The renewable energy windmills spinning are causing the earth to slow and affecting the climate.

.....hmmm that means that in the past 38 years 999,935 Parts Per Million have not changed.........1.7 Parts per Million have changed. .....can someone explain how 1.7 PPM is changing the worlds climate?

CO2 Parts Per Million have increased by 65 parts since 1976. This is about 1.7 Parts Per Million per year for the last 38 years.

CO2 Parts Per Million have increased by 65 parts since 1976. This is about 1.7 Parts Per Million per year for the last 38 years.

Bruce...its a bloody pitty that Madam Speaker did not have the power to have them ALL,
the whole of the ALP parliamentary members.....stood up against a wall and executed by firing squad.........Putting down the rabid ALP would be the humane thing to do.....they are all mentally deranged sicko's...............