Like the Danish the Austrians are now openly stating that Climate models do not reflect reality.
They like the Danes acknowledge that further work is required on climate models to incorporate the many facets of the SUN. I.E the non radiative components.
Good to see that some are now calling it out.
The pressure has been immense on meteorologist to tow the line or lose their job.
In science, controversial debates are part of the agenda. And that's a good thing, because it puts models through their paces. However, there is a branch of science for which this does not apply. In the climate sciences, as is generally known, there is a 97% consensus on all topics. The remaining 3% are crazy. Because who contradicts the "consensus" open, can forget his career. He is marginalized and excluded from project funding opportunities. So you better shut up. All the more surprising the critical employment of the Austrian Central Institute for Meteorology and Geodynamics (ZAMG) with the topic of climate change. On the website of the ZAMG the Viennese scientists discuss important criticisms:
On 22 October 2018, the NOAA ventured a forecast: The North American winter 2018/19 would probably be particularly mild . The opposite has happened, namely one of the coldest winters of recent history. Forecasts are tricky, especially if they affect the future ...
Anthropogenic climate drive overvalued?
Strengths-weaknesses analysis helpful
It will take some time to develop to properly reflect the balance of the drives in the climate models. Fundamental criticism of the performance of climate models, however, equals denial of reality. It is crucial to clearly distinguish which results climate models can provide with certainty (see articles on strengths ) and which ones are not yet (see article on weaknesses ).
