& Tornado Alley
Chapter 9 in the third assessment report of the IPCC, Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis gives the projections of future climate change.
The models are evaluated by having them to reproduce the current climate characteristics. The deviations between the models' computed climate characteristics and the observed data are referred to as biases rather than errors. This is what the third assessment report has to say on regional climate and the models.
At the regional scale the models display area-average biases that are highly variable from region-to-region and among models, with sub-continental area-averaged seasonal temperature biases typically within 4°C and precipitation biases mostly between −40 and +80% of observations. (page 585)
The subcontinental areas being consider are as shown below.
Based on simulations of the future climate under increased concentration of carbon dioxide the task force subscribed to the average projections:
The assessment report also had conclusions with respect to the variability of weather conditions
An important element of the analysis is the basis for estimating variability. At least for some of its predictions the IPCC uses the variation among its models as the prediction of the variability of Earth's climate. There is absolutely no intellectual justification for such a procedure.
The exact phrasing of these conclusions is important. There is a different level of confidence involved in the use of the phrase it is very likely than in the phrase it is likely. These reflect more confidence than the phrase will likely and all three reflect greater confidence than the may in extreme precipitation intensies may increase. The lowest level of confidence appears in the phrase are indicated as in Increases in the occurrence of drought or dry spells are indicated. The Report does not spell out what the bases are for any of the levels of conclusions. The suspicion is unavoidable that the phrases may and are indicated reflect the judgements of the authors and would not bear up well under careful scrutiny. The public is left with the notion that hard science is predicting not only global warming but also more frequent extreme conditions of temperature and precipitation; i.e., flooding sometimes and drought other times. That is not the case. The only basis for such statements is the projections of computer models and those computer models fail their validation tests.
HOME PAGE OF Thayer Watkins