IPCC Report Released, Claims We’re Doomed

I’m sure everyone is utterly shocked by the what the report claims, because the IPCC hasn’t been utterly alarmist for decades. It’s like putting Dawn Of The Dead in the DVD player and expecting…zombies

Panel’s Warning on Climate Risk: Worst Is Yet to Come

Climate change is already having sweeping effects on every continent and throughout the world’s oceans, scientists reported Monday, and they warned that the problem is likely to grow substantially worse unless greenhouse emissions are brought under control.

The report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations group that periodically summarizes climate science, concluded that ice caps are melting, sea ice in the Arctic is collapsing, water supplies are coming under stress, heat waves and heavy rains are intensifying, coral reefs are dying, and fish and many other creatures are migrating toward the poles or in some cases going extinct.

That’s from hyper-Alarmist Justin Gillis at the NY Times. CNN refuses to be outdone

Little time left to turn down the world’s heat, U.N. says

Your forecast for the next century: Hotter, drier and hungrier, and the chance to turn down the thermostat is slipping away.

That’s the latest conclusion from the United Nations, which urged governments to address the “increasingly clear” threats posed by a warming climate before some options are closed off for good. The latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded that taking steps to reduce the carbon dioxide emissions blamed for rising temperatures could buy more time to adjust to a warmer world.

And the UK Independent

IPCC report: War, famine and pestilence – ‘Climate change is happening and no one in the world is immune’

Washington Post

Panel warns of worsening effects of climate change

MSNBC

UN: World ‘ill-prepared’ for risks from climate change

And it continues on and on, humorously, since these same news organizations, much less the UN IPCC, put out vasts amounts of “carbon pollution” in going about their own business. Perhaps if the UN IPCC did away with their own fossil fueled travel, especially for their yearly working vacations in nice spots around the world, they might be credible.

Jeff Dunetz asks the questions that always go through my head

  • Why did the Earth stop warming 17 years ago? (WT-technically, the rise is statistically insignificant)
  • The climate models used to predict global warming proved to be wrong, what makes the revised models more reliable?
  • What makes the IPCC so sure the warming trend of the 1980s through the mid 199os and the warming stoppage ever since, aren’t simply part of the Earth’s natural climate cycles?
  • Since global warming stopped over 17 years ago, why didn’t their doom and gloom predictions reveal themselves back then?

Let’s not forget, the models have been 95% wrong

As The Hockey Schtick notes in their header “If you can’t explain the ‘pause’, you can’t explain the cause…” Warmists try and explain away the pause, blaming it mostly on natural variability. So, why can’t the short warming spike from 1980 to about 1996 be mostly natural? The same as happened several times since the end of the Little Ice Age?

I’ll flog my meme once more: if Warmists are not concerned enough to change their own behavior, why should we believe them? This year, the UN Convention On Climate Change will hold a big conference in Bonn, Germany in June, followed by the big COP 20 (Conference on the Parties), held via teleconference, in order to make it as “carbon neutral” as possible. Just kidding. It will be held in the exotic vacation spot of Lima, Peru.

More: Lord Christopher Monckton (a name guaranteed to send Warmists into apoplexy, what is referred to scientifically as “Moonbat Level 10”) discusses the report, and offers this interesting graph

Now, Warmists will bleat out “cherry picked!!!!!!” But

Meanwhile, the discrepancy between prediction and observation continues to grow. Here is the IPCC’s predicted global warming trend since January 2005, taken from Fig. 11.25 of the Fifth Assessment Report, compared with the trend on the dataset of datasets since then. At present, the overshoot is equivalent to 2 Cº/century.

You can see Figure 11.25 here, from this page. We continue to see that the “model” prognostications have little to do with real world measurements. This in no way invalidates the notion that the Earth is currently in a warm period. What it does do is provide more evidence that blaming anthropogenic causes mostly/solely for warming at any time during the Modern Warm Period is foolish, unscientific, and wishful thinking, leading any rational thinking person to wonder exactly what the point of this whole exercise in Blamestorming and telling scary stories is.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

14 Responses to “IPCC Report Released, Claims We’re Doomed”

  1. Jeffery says:

    Teach,

    Your zombie analogy is appropriate since you once again bring to life your list of zombie lies:

    Why did the Earth stop warming 17 years ago? (WT-technically, the rise is statistically insignificant) (J – technically, the Earth’s surface and oceans have warmed steadily for the past 17.5 years and there is no reason to think it will stop)

    The climate models used to predict global warming proved to be wrong, what makes the revised models more reliable? (J – the models over estimated surface warming the past decade largely because of unpredictable volcano and Pacific ocean effects – even with those “cooling”, plus a cooling sun, the Earth still warmed)

    What makes the IPCC so sure the warming trend of the 1980s through the mid 199os and the warming stoppage ever since, aren’t simply part of the Earth’s natural climate cycles? (There has been no “warming stoppage” so this question is moot.)

    Since global warming stopped over 17 years ago, why didn’t their doom and gloom predictions reveal themselves back then? (Global warming hasn’t stopped).

    Let’s not forget, the models have been 95% wrong. (This is incorrect and meaningless. The models predicted warming from CO2 accumulation, and we’re getting warming from CO2 accumulation. Do you have another potential cause of warming? NB – Magic is not a cause.)

  2. gitarcarver says:

    This is incorrect and meaningless.

    Ummm…. nope.

    First, the statement is correct. Whether the models fail is highly significant as it shows a fault somewhere. Whether that fault is in the data, the models themselves or the theory, there is a fault.

    You want to skip that part because finding that fault would mean that they theory of AGW could be wrong.

    You cannot stand having your cult’s beliefs challenged.

  3. Jl says:

    “Do you have another potential cause of the warming?” You mean the warming that’s stopped? We’ll, yes. That would be the same mechanism that warmed the earth on and off for the 4 billion years before you got here. Do you have any evidence that the same process isn’t the cause now?

  4. david7134 says:

    Jeff,
    As I said before, we are closer to the sun. In addition, we are undergoing an unprecedented amount of solar activity, HAM operators can attest to this as they have never been able to bounce there transmission as easy as now. It is clear from your responses to my questions in the past that the whole concept of CO2 is bunk.

  5. Jeffery says:

    So Christopher, the Grand Lord of Monckton, chose a 9.17 year temperature record for comparison. He also started the lines at different points on his graph. Why would he do that?

    Why do you suppose the Lord chose the period from 2005 to 2014 for comparison? (You know the answer, as do I. Your Lord is trying to mislead you.)

    If we cherry-pick (as did the Lord) and look at the period from 2008-2014 and use the mean of the 5 datasets as did the Lord, we find the Earth warming at the rate of 0.15 C/decade. The models predicted (according to the Lord) 0.18 C/decade. That seems pretty close.

    Is 5 years too short a time for you? Try 20 yrs. The mean increase is 0.165 C/decade for the past 20 years (using the Lord’s 5 datasets). That’s still pretty close to 0.18 C from the models, isn’t it?

    The Lord chose exactly 9.17 years as the interval for a reason.

    The Earth continues to warm because of CO2 being added to the atmosphere, regardless of what your Lord says.

  6. Jeffery says:

    david,

    Please give us more information about your closer to the Sun hypothesis. Also, explain what you mean by “unprecedented” solar activity. Is the Earth receiving more radiation from the Sun now than 100 yrs ago?

    The whole concept of CO2 is bunk? Do you deny that CO2 absorbs radiation in the infrared?

  7. Jl says:

    J- “the mean increase is .0165/C/decade for the last 20 years. ” That would show something if you could compare it to other decades of the past. But you can’t, because there’s no comparable data, so you have no idea if that’s rapid or not. What do you think the chances are that there were comparable warming periods in the last 4 billion years? Somewhat good, no? And even then it’s still not tied to CO2.

  8. Jl says:

    Sure people have seen this before-saw it over at Goddard’s place. “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” H.L Mencken

  9. Jeffery says:

    jl,

    You miss the point. Monckton, The Lord, is lying to you, and Teach is passing it along.

    So you think global warming is a hoax unless we invent and build a time machine, go back in time and monitor temperature changes over the past 4 billion years and show that the current rapid warming is unique?

    Seems like a pretty high hurdle. But even if we do that, you’ll still deny the overwhelming evidence supporting the theory of AGW.

    In the past 100 yrs or so the global average surface temperature has increased an astounding 1.4 F, making the Earth the warmest since humans formed civilization, some 10,000 years ago!

  10. gitarcarver says:

    So you think global warming is a hoax unless we invent and build a time machine, go back in time and monitor temperature changes over the past 4 billion years and show that the current rapid warming is unique?

    Given that the claims are from warmists that the earth is warming faster in its history, unless you have the data to back that statement up (and you admit you don’t) the statement is false.

    It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see who is lying here and it is the warmists.

    But even if we do that, you’ll still deny the overwhelming evidence supporting the theory of AGW.

    You mean since there is no data to support the claims of the warmists and in fact there is contrary data, the theory should not be supported?

    You betcha.

    In the past 100 yrs or so the global average surface temperature has increased an astounding 1.4 F, making the Earth the warmest since humans formed civilization, some 10,000 years ago!

    And the data for that is where?

    There is no hard data on temperatures. There is only extrapolation of so called data based on theories that cannot be proven.

    One of Jeffery’s favorite tricks is to say “what else is causing the earth to warm?” as if the statement means that the science is known and understood.

    If it were, the climate models would not be off. We would not see modelers changing data to fit the model and not the model to fit the data.

    Jeffery’s premise is that if we don’t know everything and the way it interacts, the theory of AGW must be correct. That’s not science. That is a cult like mentality that no facts, logic or critical thinking will ever change.

  11. Jeffery says:

    “It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see who is lying here and it is the warmists.”

    Conspiratorial ideation is a recurring theme in reactionary thought and writing. Do you really believe there is a global conspiracy of governments, international bodies, scientific organizations and almost every scientist on Earth?

    The science deniers are lying. You’ll have to explain your motivation for lying.

    Are you comfortable assuming your small band of deniers (admittedly, politically astute and successful) are right on this issue?

    “Given that the claims are from warmists that the earth is warming faster in its history, unless you have the data to back that statement up (and you admit you don’t) the statement is false.”

    Since you deny the data we do have, what’s the point. Unless we go back in time with the way-back machine with a thermometer you will argue there is no data.

    We only have the data we have, obviously. This period of rapid warming results from added atmospheric CO2 – if you had another explanation other than magic, you would have offered it by now. It is also why you wish to change the conversation to what may or may not have happened 4 billion years ago.

    The Earth is warming. It’s warming because of CO2 we’ve added to the atmosphere. This will impact human civilization, perhaps positively in some cases, but mostly negatively.

  12. david7134 says:

    Jeff, You are doing it again, you are definitely making people skeptical of your religion. You do more to thwart the concept of global warming than 10 deniers. Keep it up. And I agree, warming is a better climate to be in than what we have experienced in the past.

  13. gitarcarver says:

    Do you really believe there is a global conspiracy of governments, international bodies, scientific organizations and almost every scientist on Earth?

    I am pretty sure that no one has mentioned a conspiracy, but one has to wonder why you keep lying in saying “every scientist on earth” when it comes to belief in AGW.

    The science deniers are lying.

    Agreed. You are lying.

    Since you deny the data we do have, what’s the point.

    So you admit that there is no data. Good. That’s a start.

    Unless we go back in time with the way-back machine with a thermometer you will argue there is no data.

    That is a funny line but irrelevant to the discussion. You are making statements based on the idea that we have solid data.

    When you say the world is warming faster that in its history, you don’t have data to support that. Your statement is sheer hyperbole. So one must wonder why you must create such hyperbole if your claims are honest and true? Why not let the data stand on its own?

    This period of rapid warming results from added atmospheric CO2 – if you had another explanation other than magic, you would have offered it by now.

    Why? Are you saying that you and the warmists know everything on how the earth heats and cools?

    If that is the case, then why do the models not work?

    Why is it that warmists, contrary to all other sciences, say “we don’t have the data, but here is a statement based on the data…” and “we cannot predict the results, but this is what is going to happen?”

    It is laughable and you know it.

    Oh, and by the way, Al Gore and you are still hypocrites in the AGW debate and your unwillingness of you, Gore and people of your ilk to change your lifestyle shows that your talk about AGW is bluster and that you don’t actually believe what you type.

    Actions speak louder than words Jeffery.

  14. The Earth is warming. It’s warming because of CO2 we’ve added to the atmosphere.

    First, there has been no statistically significant warming in well over 17 years. Which has made your models 95% wrong. Second, when it comes to CO2, you have to prove that using the scientific method, not talking points. And you can’t.

Bad Behavior has blocked 6503 access attempts in the last 7 days.

%d bloggers like this: