Scientific Forecasters Pour Cold Water on Temperature Projections

Al Gore’s film, An Inconvenient Truth, has initiated something of a backlash as scientists, heretofore absent from the global warming debate, have begun to criticize Mr. Gore, and by extension, much of the underpinnings of the global warming hypothesis.

 

One such critic is Professor Scott Armstrong, a leading expert on forecasting with the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania.  Professor Armstrong hasn’t just criticized Mr. Gore; he has put his money where his mouth is by challenging the former VP to a $10,000 bet, based on climate predictions.

 

On September 13, the Center for Science and Public Policy hosted a briefing where Professor Armstrong presented the findings of an audit he and his colleague, Professor Kesten Green with Monash University’s Business and Economic Forecasting Unit in New Zealand, conducted on Chapter 8 of the IPCC’s Working Group I report, The Physical Science Basis. 

 

As noted in the presentation, they found no evidence that the IPCC authors were aware of the primary sources of information on forecasting. Indeed, as Professor Armstrong stated, “We have been unable to find a single scientific forecast to support global warming.”

 

They also found that there was only enough information within the IPCC report to make a judgment on 89 of the total 140 forecasting principles as described in Professor Armstrong’s book, Principles of Forecasting.  Of these 89 principles, the IPCC violated 72.

 

The power point slides and video of the Professor Armstrong's presentation are available here.