Industry-funded Republicans have been saying for a generation now that scientists’ warning about global warming are exaggerated. At first, I could understand their skepticism. Back in the 1980s, when predictions about global warming first hit the mainstream media, they sounded preposterous to me, and I made fun of them. I didn’t actually read about any of the studies, though. I simply rejected the idea on its face.
Eventually, I grew up a bit, and I paid more attention to the details of what scientists have been saying. My skepticism was satisfied. Of course, no one really knows for certain what the future will be like, but we can say the probability for serious global warming caused by human activity is 100% – because it’s already here.
Of course, people are now wondering what will happen in the future. After all this time, industry-funded Republicans are still saying that scientists’ predictions about global warming are exaggerated.
That’s not what the data says, though. This week, John Fasullo and Kevin Trenberth from the National Center for Atmospheric Research published the results of a peer-reviewed study in the journal Science. The study examined the predictive worth of climate models, based on data that already exists where the models have already been used, predicting humidity levels. They found that the models that predict more extreme global warming are those that have the greatest degree of accuracy.