[cabaalis]

> based on the premise that water levels around Wilmington would rise 2 feet by 2050.

I'm curious. I've been hearing about the expected effects of climate change for many years. At least since ~2005 or 2006. Are there any predictions of conditions in 2000, or 2020, which have panned out as predicted?

[koops]

I don't know about sea level rise prediction accuracy, but temperature "hindcasts" hold up pretty well:

https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-well-have-climate-m...

[pdonis]

> I don't know about sea level rise prediction accuracy

We have no way of knowing because no predictions were made for periods of time prior to now, so we have nothing to compare with the data.

The dire predictions of rapid rise in the future are based on the future predictions of climate models being correct, but the models are already known to over-predict future warming.

https://judithcurry.com/2018/11/27/special-report-on-sea-lev...

> temperature "hindcasts" hold up pretty well

But temperature forecasts don't. Hindcasts aren't predictions.

https://judithcurry.com/2015/12/17/climate-models-versus-cli...

[EPress1970]

What's noteworthy is that the IPCC forecast for sea level rise is not accepted anymore by many, for some reason. The IPCC used to be gold standard, now it's not alarmist enough. From the report:

> Subsequent to the 2013 IPCC AR5, there has been a focus on the possible worst-case scenario for global sea level rise. Estimates of the maximum possible global sea level rise by the end of the 21st century range from 1.6 to 3 meters [5-10 feet], and even higher. These extreme values of possible sea level rise are regarded as extremely unlikely or so unlikely that we cannot even assign a probability. Nevertheless, these extreme, barely possible values of sea level rise are now becoming anchored as outcomes that are driving local adaptation plans

[neuronexmachina]

https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Judith_Curry

> Climate scientists criticize her uncertainty-focused spiel for containing elementary mistakes and inflammatory assertions unsupported by evidence. Curry is a regular at Anthony Watts' denier blog, as well as Steve McIntyre's Climate Audit, another denier site. She has further embarrassed herself (and her university) by using refuted denier talking points and defending the Wegman Report, eventually admitting she hadn't even read it in the first place.[1] Curry has agreed with Trump's description of climate change as a "hoax", writing in 2016 that the UN's definition of manmade climate change "qualifies as a hoax".

[kevinskii]

I'm not sure if you're aware, but "denier" is a loaded term that is used to equate the questioning of climate science with Holocaust denial. It has no place in a civilized discussion.

As for Climate Audit, the Wegman Report, and Judith Curry: Maybe try reading one of them sometime. I think you'll find that they are nothing like their detractors try to portray them to be.

[cagenut]

It is astounding how spot on it has all been. The data is so crystal clear.

[rfinney]

I keep seeing charts that say otherwise: https://cei.org/sites/default/files/Figure%201.JPG . This suggests the models are not accurate.

Who is right?

[makerofspoons]

Certainly not the CEI's (Competitive Enterprise Institute) who distributed your figure. They have a long history of spreading disinformation, going back to the fight over tobacco policy: https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Competitive_Enterprise...

[lifeformed]

I never understood why "climate skeptics" don't see past this glaringly obvious fact: almost every time there is some "rebuttal" against climate change, the source comes back to a conservative think tank or oil company. Hello??? It's so frustrating.

[rfinney]

Isn't "attacking the motive" a logical fallacy?

https://study.com/academy/lesson/attacking-the-motive-fallac...

[njarboe]

I never understood why "climate change" advocates don't see past this glaringly obvious fact: almost every time there is some action advocated to "stop climate change", the source comes back to some progressive group. They are always advocating some pet progressive agenda like mass transit, human population reduction, or the reduction of living standards by forcing energy use reductions. Hello??? It's so frustrating.

We need to find ways to reduce CO2 emissions that will improve the lives of people instead of making them worse. How about massive R&D into nuclear power to make it safer, education about radiation so that people are not so irrationally afraid of it, fusion power research, a carbon tax and research into how to remove CO2 from the atmosphere so that, if we can get cheaper power, we can use it to fix the problem. The Tesla Roadster and the Model S is how you get people to switch to electric cars, not at huge gas tax (they tried that in Europe, btw).

[pdonis]

> Certainly not the CEI's (Competitive Enterprise Institute) who distributed your figure.

The CEI is only one of many places that "distribute" this figure. As you can see from the lower left of the figure, it was actually made by John Christy, a climate scientists who showed it in testimony before the US House of Representatives in 2015. A good discussion of the chart and what it means is given in the Judith Curry article I linked to in another post upthread.

[Symmetry]

Notice that all the graphs in the previous charts have that weird step where warming stops for while around 2005 then suddenly shoots up after 2015 to get back to predicted levels? Your graphs end at 2014.

[nfg]

There’s a good analysis of what seems to be the same chart (and more like it) here: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2016/05/compar...

TL;DR: it is using every trick in the book to mislead.

[rfinney]

Every trick in the book?

https://climateaudit.org/2016/04/19/gavin-schmidt-and-refere...

Who is right?

[300bps]

My favorite article on this topic was from The Independent in 2000 that stated snowfalls in England were a thing of the past and children would not know what snow is within a few years.

The Independent finally deleted the article but here’s a summary of it:

http://www.globalwarming.org/2010/12/27/headline-2000-snowfa...

[Retric]

Sea level rises is currently only 8cm in the last 20 years, but it has happened. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_level_rise#/media/File%3...

PS: It’s all’s up 18 cm from 1897 but recent rise has been much more obvious.