Climate Change Report (NCADAC) Inaccurate & Misleading : More Snake Oil

This is much like the order from the progressive socialists in the White House to start the loan program again that gives special treatment to borrowers that have poor or nonexistent credit ratings in the face of the catastrophic mortgage disaster that brought down our economy just a few years ago. What in the world is going on here! Insanity running wild.

Now, in the face of overwhelming evidence, from multiply sources from around the world, that states the data that is currently available to support man-made climate change is completely fraudulent, the new report that has come forth from the Climate Assessment and Development Advisory Committee(NCADAC) is just more of the same manufactured information that supports the same illogical and unsupported claim of disaster if we don't do something right now to stop our own demise, begs the Hillary quote, " I have to have a willing suspension of disbelief".

As this article points out, this report cost the taxpayers 3.5 billion dollars to produce. If that figure alone, not to mention the 1,200 page report packed with misinformation, tainted data and outright  nonsense, isn't enough to make your head explode, then I'm not sure what would.

New Climate Report Is Grossly Inaccurate and Misleading
Source: Patrick Michaels, "Countdown to Climate Change: It's Only 297 Years Away!" Forbes, April 1, 2013.

April 11, 2013

Climatologists have suffered numerous blows to their reputation as evidence continues to emerge about data altering and a plethora of half-truths used as propaganda. A new report by the National Climate Assessment and Development Advisory Committee (NCADAC) is no exception. Full of incomplete statements and misquoted citations, the report fails to come up with meaningful climate predictions, says Patrick Michaels, director of the Center for the Study of Science at the Cato Institute.

• The first report in 2000 used only two of the dozen climate models available. The two models it used predicted the largest changes in precipitation and temperature. The chosen models were so erroneous that they were wrong by the time they were published and overestimated warming by three times the observed values.
• In 2009, the second report, produced by the U.S. Global Change Research Program, was released. The report was missing hundreds of scientific papers illustrating the growth-enhancing effects of atmospheric carbon dioxide.
• The newest report by NCADAC, at 1,200 pages in length, is full of inconsistencies and misleading evidence.

In the higher emissions forecast of the new report, the model predicts drastic changes in precipitation by season. In the winter, most of North America would receive more precipitation while in the fall and spring, the southern regions of North America would become significantly drier.

• The report claims that scientists have broad confidence that the changes are all predicted to be roughly the same by all 18 models.
• However, nowhere in the 1,200 page report is there any evidence to back up the claim.
• Even if the some of the predictions in the report are true, critics question how long it will take for any forecast to become a detectable change.

Further examination of the report's conclusion tested how long it will take for any forecast to become a detectable change. The test results show that in any predicted season where confidence is large, more precipitation changes would happen in the spring, which is good for farmers.

• Despite the report's projections, it will be 520 years before a state's precipitation changes significantly in the summer.
• In the winter, it will 330 years before a state's precipitation changes.
• On average, it will be 297 years before precipitation changes significantly.

The contrasting empirical results display the inaccuracies of the NCADAC report, which cost $3.5 billion of taxpayer money to produce.