How Could the IPCC Make an Error this Large?
Earlier this week I discussed the mystifying continued prioritization of the outdated and implausible RCP8.5 scenario by the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute (KNMI) in its scenarios expected to guide Dutch climate policies for the next decade. Since then I have heard from many friends and colleagues in the Netherlands offering a wide range of perspectives on what happened and what should happen next.
These exchanges have prompted me to summarize how the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has treated climate scenarios in its most recent assessment reports. Today I document a major error made by the IPCC in its fifth assessment report (AR5) which has had profound consequences for climate research and policy in the decade since.
Settle in, this one is a doozy.
How?
Intentionally, that’s how.
Bingo
“The Common Enemy of Humanity Is Man.
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill”.
‘The First Global Revolution’, The Club of Rome, 1991.
Reminds me of Bob Dylan recording “Rainy Day Women” in Nashville. He told the producer that he wanted the horn section to sound really stupid, and suggested that they bring in a Salvation Army band? The producer replied, “now Bob, I think you’ll find that these boys here in the studio can play plenty stupid, if they just put their minds to it.”
All of the “models” are riddled with errors, adjustments, and other issues… none of that will change the cultist’s minds
It’s not a cult as much as it’s long running terrorist maneuver by the worldwide Socialist Party.
The biggest error was declaring that anthropogenic global warming was real, and that science supported that conclusion.
But it wasn’t a mistake – as usual the people behind these organizations first arrive at the conclusion, and then work backwards to cherry-pick the data that seems to support it. Usually by torturing it until it bears no resemblance to what it was before being “smoothed out”.
The goal being to further erode the few remaining rights, freedoms, and dwindling wealth of the slave class.
AKA everyone but them.
And sadly that’s all it takes to convince most of the population today, who are as brainwashed as the proverbial rodents marching off a cliff.
If memory serves, I think they were marmots…
I think you are thinking of lemmings.
Fiction.
Lemmings or marmots don’t commit mass suicide.
Apparently my sarcasm was too subtle.
Apparently, I got it right off. Our killer friend.
Mistake?
No mistake.
When engaged in Policy Based Evidence Manufacturing,science and the scientific method are second and third under the bus.
First under of course was honesty.
Anthropogenic Global Warming,of the catastrophic kind,is an intelligence test..
But nothing makes you sound more sciency , than extrapolating linear trends from cyclic data.
Pielke Jr does a fine job of documenting the fraud perpetrated on the population by the U.N., national governments, the likes of Environment Canada, etc. – all with the active support of the media and the consent of the world’s leading scientists happy to be bought off with generous funding for research.
Here’s an example directly related to the IPCC “error” outlined above. CBC has a “Climate Dashboard” with “projections,” the most alarmist of which are based on a theoretical “scenario” named RCP8.5. (A bit nerdy here – RCP8.5 denotes irradiance of 8.5 watts per square meter in the year 2100, mainly caused by increasing CO2 levels.) This “predicts” a high level of global warming. The problem is that the top scientists involved in climate modelling UNANIMOUSLY agree that the scenario is NOT physically possible and that we are tracking toward a MUCH less alarmist future.
Does CBC follow the science? No. Does Environment Canada follow the science? No.
It is government POLICY to lie to you.
https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/features/2023/climate-dashboard/
The money talks, bailing on net zero.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/net-zero-ship-starting-sink
But Canada is not on this list of nations re-thinking net zero because of our infantile PM and his moronic cadre of advisors and ministers. No business case for a re-think, I guess.
RNrn
80 not 50.
It’s nice to see rationality make some progress. The projection made in a quote in the article that banning the use of fossil fuels (ie. achieving NetZero) would result in the deaths of 50% of the planet’s population is an optimistic estimate, at least in the developed West. 80% of the US population live in urban areas, thus 80% of the US population begins starving to death once vehicular transport of foodstuffs to distribution centers and grocery stores ends. Fossil fuels are essential to vehicular transport of the essentials to urban populations. The End.
Way back when Prentice was Minister of the Environment..”Environment Canada defers to the findings of the IPCC”.
When asked,”Who accepted these “IPCC findings” on behalf of Canada”?
“Canada defers to the findings of the UN IPCC”.
When asked’Where might I find these documents?”
“Canada defers to the findings of the UN IPCC”.
Whole bunch of treacherous deadwood.
“Environment Canada’s Science”…
a) I’m still waiting for someone to define “Global Climate.” As best I know, there is no global climate. The Köppen climate classification system describes the various climates of the Earth. But I suppose that if you were to settle on a Global Climate, then it’s best described as the 2.3 million year ice age the Earth is experiencing, with its ~100,000-year glaciations and ~12,000-year interglacial periods. Now that is Global Climate change.
ii) I’m still waiting for evidence that CO2 is the climate control knob or the Earth’s temperature control knob. I have yet to see any such evidence, and the ice cores and Mona loa measurements indicate that changes in CO2 levels lag changes in temperature at all time scales. Saying CO2 controls temperature has cause and effect reversed.
3) CO2 is a greenhouse (poorly named effect) gas and the Earth would not be as warm with less CO2. However, the greenhouse gas elephant in the room is water vapor. The quantity and effects of the water vapor in Earth’s atmosphere positively dwarfs any effects of CO2. That, and the effect of CO2 is logarithmic.
So far, as best I know, those bits of science are settled.
All of the alarm and frantic warnings that “We’re all gonna DIIIIIIIE!!!! are based on “projections” from models built on the unproven assumption that CO2 is the control knob of the climate and that there would be a runaway positive feedback loop with water vapor. Evidence against that are past atmospheric CO2 levels in the thousands of parts per million, and the oceans didn’t boil away.
“Settled Science®” indeed. I like that Feynman quote in the linked article, “Better to have questions that we can’t answer than answers that we can’t question.”
CO2-based Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming? No evidence. Only models. I’m still waiting for any evidence that we can avoid the next glaciation. Geological history is not on our side.
H.R.,
Brilliant post.
The “Global Climate” and/or earth’s average temperature is clearly a meaningless figure. Take the temperature at the highest peaks in the Himalayas, and the temperature in Death Valley and average the two, and somehow the result is a meaningful data point? Outright absurdity.
It is remarkable how the history of the globe’s past climatic variations is never discussed by Alarmists. The Alarmist dialogue is always driven by imaginary projections shown in climate models that cannot even reproduce known past historical conditions.
I don’t think objective reality will ever hit home with the Climate Cupcakes until they find out what the price of insurance is for their rolling IEDs.
Thank you! My thoughts very well expressesd.
One that I’m still trying to figure out is how everywhere is warming twice as fast as everywhere else. At least that’s what some article or other claims, seemingly on a weekly basis. It’s announced (alarum! alarum!) that some city or area is warming twice as fast as the rest of the world!!!! (and for good measure !!!!!!) Next week, same claim, different city.
Another one that has me stumped is how Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming will cause the oceans to boil away but, BUTTTT… we must all run for the hills as we will soon be inundated by sea level rise. Color me confused. Which is it?
No worries though. Just like the Next Ice Age of the ’70s, the solution for CAGW is the very same.
1) Raise taxes
2) Eliminate fossil fuel use
3) Stop eating meat
4) Form a One-World government
I gather that’s also the solution for the Heartbreak of Psoriasis, Iron Poor Blood and Ring Around The Collar, but I digress.
The Climate Cupcakes make up so much stuff, it’s impossible for there not to be the occasional paradox. Great job pointing out the Global Boiling versus We’re All Gonna Drown conundrum.
Man has always had to adapt to the conditions of the planet. This will not change no matter how insane we become.
The “Global Climate” is the climate as presented by Global TV.
How?
It’s not a mistake, they’re lying bastiges.
Once you understand that they’re just f-ing lying, everything else becomes quite obvious.
It’s long been obvious that RCP8.5 is an alarmist tool. Useful to the cupcakes in constructing and spreading propaganda, but wholly useless, from a science-based perspective.
I have however found it useful in determining which “Climate Science” articles to ignore. Any article or scientific study based on RCP8.5 is immediately discarded as cupcake witchcraft.
Tune in on Sunday at 8 pm.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/10/13/climatetv-live-at-1pm-et-this-new-film-challenges-the-climate-orthodoxy/
How could the IPCC make such a large error? The IPCC scam is too large to make small errors.
There’s no such thing as an “honest mistake” in climate science.
Policy Based Evidence Manufacturing.
This is the bureaus default position.
And why we must fire them all.
Strip their pensions.
And force them to pay back every dollar paid them,from the day they broke their oath of service.
Treason most foul.
The UN IPCC.
Comrade Maurice, or Uncle Moe, according to Dear Leader….Canada Leading the Way!
An answer to the question above: “why is every place warming faster than average?”
This is deliberate misdirection by Environment Canada, et al.
There are three separate measurements of global temperature: Land, Ocean and the global average. Because land is warming up more rapidly than the dominant oceans, you can (dishonestly) compare nearly any land spot on earth to the global average and claim it’s warming faster.
Lyin’ bastards.