[freebeard]

news.slashdot.org: Climate Models Are Running Red Hot, and Scientists Don't Know Why (bloomberg.com)

There are dozens of climate models, and for decades they've agreed on what it would take to heat the planet by about 3 Celsius. It's an outcome that would be disastrous -- flooded cities, agricultural failures, deadly heat -- but there's been a grim steadiness in the consensus among these complicated climate simulations. Then last year, unnoticed in plain view, some of the models started running very hot. The scientists who hone these systems used the same assumptions about greenhouse-gas emissions as before and came back with far worse outcomes. Some produced projections in excess of 5C, a nightmare scenario.
[snip]
The reason for worry is that these same models have successfully projected global warming for a half century. Their output continues to frame all major scientific, policy and private-sector climate goals and debates, including the sixth encyclopedic assessment by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change due out next year. If the same amount of climate pollution will bring faster warming than previously thought, humanity would have less time to avoid the worst impacts.

Are the models trending hotter or is the actual climate trending colder?

In other news: https://www.bbc.com/news: Milan car ban: Drivers ignore anti-pollution measure
______________

edit:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2oy1ZroK_EI

This guy is a sort of an anti-Trump; he's got orange rings around his eyes. [kidding, I respect his opinions]