In 1988, NASA’s James Hansen predicted a huge increase in heat and drought.
If you liked last summer’s record temperatures, you’re going to love the 1990s, says James Hansen, the NASA scientist who, during congressional hearings on the Midwestern drought, linked greenhouse warming to the heat wave. Last summer was a preview of the average summer 10 years from now, and the hottest summers during the ’90s will be even hotter and drier than the one we just struggled through, he says.
If we do nothing to cut down on pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, temperatures in 2050 will be 6 to 7 degrees higher than they are today. Washington, D.C., for instance, would go from its current 35 days a year over 90 degrees to 85 days a year.
– James Hansen 1988
12 Dec 1988, Page 34 – Lansing State Journal
He got all of his forecasts exactly backwards. The number of hot days in the DC area peaked in 1911, and have been declining ever since.
The number of hot days in the Midwest peaked in 1936, and have been declining ever since.
The last really dry year in the Midwest was 1988, and recent years have been record wet.
Climate at a Glance | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)
Hansen made temperature forecasts for three emissions scenarios. Scenario A was increasing emission growth rates. Scenario B was decreasing emission growth rates. Scenario C was no emissions after the year 2000.
“We have considered cases ranging from business as usual, which is scenario A, to draconian emission cuts, scenario C, which would totally eliminate net trace gas growth by year 2000.”
Climate Change and American Policy: Key Documents, 1979-2015 – Google Books
So how did Hansen do? The graph below shows the five year mean of lower troposphere temperatures measured by satellite.
Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs
The next graph overlays the satellite lower troposphere temperatures in red, on Hansen’s 1988 forecasts – at the same scale and normalized to the early 1980’s. Lower troposphere temperatures have tracked Hansen’s zero emissions scenario.
The press quite predictably responded to Hansen’s massive failures, by declaring them to be correct.
I thought it interesting that Hansen did not plot his scenario B and C values out to the same calendar point as the A scenario. I wonder if he thought we’d not be impressed by the moderate nature of the warming.
Mr. Heller: You are better at this than I am, can you find an article by Seth B. that promotes Hansen’s position on nuclear power? Ever?
I may be asking too much, the hardest search is trying to find what ain’t.
Not by Seth, but these involve Hansen
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/03/nuclear-power-paves-the-only-viable-path-forward-on-climate-change
https://thinkprogress.org/why-james-hansen-is-wrong-about-nuclear-power-44b486ed8a72/
John H: Seth’s readership can’t handle the truth.
https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/columnists/iowa-view/2014/10/11/james-hansen-climate-change-speaking-truth-power/17118625/
I still find it hilarious that the only scenario which (more or less) fits the global temperatures evolution is the zero CO2 emission scenario C … proving (according to the IPCC own climate models) that human emitted CO2 has nothing to do with climate.
The climate clownery and all those Bozos’ nonsensical babbles would be so funny (as flathearthers are) if the consequences of the carbone related policies were not so catastrophic for the planet and for human being.
What’s the source for the historical chart of 90 degree days in DC (Lincoln, VA)?
He doesn’t have one, he pulled it out of his ass