Report gives the truth about climate at last

Posted: September 27, 2013 | Author: Jamie Spry | Filed under: AR5, Climate, Climate Bible, Climatism, IPCC, NIPCC, Science | Tags: AR5, Carter, Climate Change, Global Warming, IPCC, NIPCC, Stockholm | 7 Comments

“We need to get some broad based support,
to capture the public’s imagination…
So we have to offer up scary scenarios,
make simplified, dramatic statements
and make little mention of any doubts…
Each of us has to decide what the right balance
is between being effective and being honest.”
– Prof. Stephen Schneider,
Stanford Professor of Climatology,
lead author of many IPCC reports

“The data doesn’t matter. We’re not basing our recommendations
on the data. We’re basing them on the climate models.”
– Prof. Chris Folland,
Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research

“The only way to get our society to truly change is to
frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe.”
– emeritus professor Daniel Botkin

•••

With the release of the IPCC’s fifth climate assessment report AR5 due for release today, it’s important the reports findings are taken within the context of who the United Nations’ IPCC really are.

The IPCC is a ‘political’ (Intergovernmental) organisation masquerading as the science arm of the UN. They are charged with assessing the latest climate science and putting what they think is applicable into their report.

The most anticipated chapter is the “Summary For Policymakers,” about 30 pages long and is widely read and commented upon by politicians, bureaucrats and the media. This chapter is a summary of thousands of pages of scientific reports and is not compiled by scientists, but rather by the IPCC committee members themselves.

Their Chairman Rajendra Pachauri is the ultimate arbiter of what is released to politicians, bureaucrats and the media.

In his spare time, Pachauri writes forewords for Greenpeace publications and recently accepted an International Advertising Association “green crusader” award. He is an aggressive advocate for emissions reduction and carbon taxes.

•••

The IPCC has been widely criticised for the political nature of its organisation and its affiliations with activist groups Greenpeace and World Wildlife Fund (WWF).

Canadian investigative journalist and author Donna Laframboise identifies a conflict of interest :

“Since agendas and science don’t mix, environmentalists should keep their distance from activities that are supposed to be scientific. Their mere presence undermines the integrity of the research. It casts a shadow over the data and calls into question the conclusions.”

Enter NIPCC :

In 2004, after a United Nations climate conference in Milan, the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) was set up. NIPCC organised an international climate workshop in Vienna in April 2007, to provide an independent examination of the evidence for climate change.

Bob Carter is a former research professor at James Cook University, Queensland, Australia. He was head of the university’s School of Earth Sciences between 1981 and 1999 and then held adjunct professorial positions. In January 2013 the university allowed his adjunct status to lapse, citing ‘lack of input’ into the university. Carter was clearly blackballed for having a scientifically sceptical view on climate change, although JCU denies this. Academia at JCU more akin to life in Stalingrad than Australia.

Carter is a marine geologist, environmental scientist and a lead author of the NIPCC.

•••

via The Daily Telegraph

The issue is not “is climate change happening”, for it always is and always has. Nor is it about whether carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas or not, because all scientists agree that it is.

Rather, the key question concerns the magnitude of warming caused by the rather small 7 billion tonnes of industrial carbon dioxide that enter the atmosphere each year, compared with the natural flows from land and sea of over 200 billion tonnes.

Despite well over twenty years of study by thousands of scientists, and the expenditure of more than $100 billion in research money, an accurate quantitative answer to this question remains unknown.

Scientists who advise the United Nations (UN) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) worry that a doubling of carbon dioxide over pre-industrial levels will cause warming of between 3 and 6 deg. Celsius, whereas independent scientists calculate that the warming for a doubling will be much less – somewhere between about 0.3 and 1.2 deg. Celsius.

Meanwhile, the scientific evidence now overwhelmingly indicates that any human warming effect is deeply submerged within planet Earth’s natural variations of temperature.

Importantly, no global warming has now occurred since 1997, despite an increase of atmospheric carbon dioxide of 8%, which in turn represents 34% of all the extra human-related carbon dioxide contributed since the industrial revolution.

Few of these facts are new, yet until recently the public have been relentlessly misinformed that human-caused global warming was causing polar bears to die out, more and more intense storms, droughts and floods to occur, the monsoons to fail, sea-level rise to accelerate, ice to melt at unnatural rates, that late 20th century temperature was warmer than ever before and that speculative computer models could predict the temperature accurately one hundred years into the future.

It now turns out that not one of these assertions is true. So who has been telling us these scientific whoppers?

The United Nations, that’s who; which is not surprising given that global warming long ago gained a life of its own as a mainstream political issue, quite divorced from empirical science – politics, of course, being what the UN is all about.

The IPCC has been charged with providing advice about global warming since 1988, publishing four major summaries of the scientific literature in 1990, 1995, 2001 and 2007 and with a 5th Assessment Report due on September 27th. Press coverage indicates that this report will concede that many of the environmental threats attributed to global warming by the IPCC have hitherto been exaggerated.

Meanwhile, and starting in 2003, a new independent team of scientists has been on the climate job, drawn from universities and institutes around the world and called the Non-governmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC).

In classic Green Team: Red Team tactical management style, the NIPCC has the role of providing an alternative Red Team view of the science of global warming, acting as a sort of “defense counsel” to verify and counter the arguments mounted for climate alarm by the IPCC’s Green Team prosecution.

NIPCC’s next report – entitled “Climate Change Reconsidered. II Physical Science”, will be released on September 18th.

The report summarises many of the thousands of scientific papers that contain evidence conflicting with the idea of dangerous human-caused warming. Considered collectively, the research literature summarised by the NIPCC shows that modern climate is jogging along well within the bounds of previous natural variation.

Faced with this reality check, it is not surprising that the UN apparently intends to tone down some of its earlier over-alarmist rhetoric.

Nonetheless, it remains the case that extreme natural climate events can cause great damage to both human communities and the environment. The task ahead, therefore, is to fashion a national climate policy that prepares for and adapts to all dangerous climate events, whenever they occur and of whatever origin.

Professor Bob Carter is an Emeritus Fellow of the Institute of Public Affairs and author of the book Taxing Air

•••

Related Articles :

• JCU caves in to badgering and groupthink — blackballs “politically incorrect” Bob Carter « JoNova
• University dumps out-of-step climate change sceptic | Townsville Bulletin News
• Bob Carter and Lysenkoism – Sacked for Climate Heresy | Louis Hissink’s Crazy World
• MUST READ : Why nobody ever calls the weather normal – Climate Change Dispatch
• Sceptics weather the storm to put their case on climate – John Spooner  | The Age
• Obama & Allies Tell UN to Cover for Lack of Global Warming | The New American

Carter Links :

• MUST SEE: Professor Bob Carter “Climate Context As A Basis For Better Policy”
• Global Warming: Anthropogenic or Not? | AITSE
• MUST READ BOOK: Taxing Air – Facts and Fallacies about Climate Change

Climatism Links :

• Peer into the Heart of the IPCC, Find Greenpeace | CACA
• Déjà Vu : Himalayan glaciers to melt (again) by 2035! | CACA
• NATURE STUDY Confirms Global Warming Stopped 15 Years Ago | CACA
• UN-Settled Science
• 44th Pacific “Sinking Islands” Extortion Forum | CACA
• 97% of climate models say that 97% of climate scientists are wrong | CACA
• Bureaucratic Dioxide
• Modelling Climate Alarmism
• GLOBAL WARMING THEORY – Circular reasoning at its best
• Europe’s Green Energy Basket Case Is Barack Obama’s Dream | CACA
• One Of The More Illuminating Articles You May Ever Read On Global Warming | CACA
• SHOCKING NEWS! Arctic Summers Ice-Free in a Few Days! | CACA
• Climate money: Monopoly science « JoNova | CACA

H/t to Morrie Meerkat ‏@Climate_con

---