UN IPCC report: Imagine you are a reporter for the mainstream media
…UN IPCC Report Exposed By Its Own Members as ‘a pure political process’ — ‘Scientific truth isn’t negotiated in the dead of night behind closed doors’ — Climate Depot Round Up
Update: The UN IPCC Summary for Policymakers report is out. Follow updates here.
#
Climate Depot’s Special Report Revealing the IPCC as Political, Not Scientific
‘This is a pure political process’: Why the UN IPCC Meeting Isn’t Being Televised: ‘Scientific truth isn’t negotiated in the dead of night behind closed doors’ — ‘At the [UN IPCC] meeting, one sentence after another has been projected onto large screens. Diplomats, bureaucrats, and politicians from dozens of UN nations have haggled, horse traded, and negotiated. Eventually, phrasing that everyone can live with has been agreed upon. Then they’ve moved on to the next sentence. The meeting is closed to the public. It is closed to the media. No minutes are kept. But let us imagine that a television camera had been smuggled inside. What would we see?’ In 2007 we saw: ‘An agonizing, frustrating process, as every sentence had to be wordsmithed on a screen in front of representatives of more than 100 governments’ (Report from Donna Laframboise of NOconsensus.org)
UK Daily Mail reporter David Rose UN IPCC: ‘What’s happening here in Stockholm is final terminological shift. Global warming is dead. Long live climate change. New ocean acid emphasis!’ — ‘Cunning work, IPCC. Surface temp pause is inexplicable, but it’s wrong metric, so who cares? And PS, one unknown day it will get really hot.’
UN Scientists Who Have Turned on the UN IPCC & Man-Made Climate Fears — A Climate Depot Flashback Report — Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” – UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.
UK Daily Mail reporter David Rose UN IPCC: ‘What’s happening here in Stockholm is final terminological shift. Global warming is dead. Long live climate change. New ocean acid emphasis!’
…UN IPCC to blame warming stop on volcanoes, solar cycle — has ‘low confidence’ in attribution
…UN IPCC Expert Reviewer Dr. Vincent Gray: IPCC climate models are incapable of determining effect of greenhouse gases on climate
…‘This is a pure political process’: Why the UN IPCC Meeting Isn’t Being Televised: ‘Scientific truth isn’t negotiated in the dead of night behind closed doors’
…Climatologist Dr. Patrick J. Michaels and Chip Knappenberger: ‘New IPCC Report Will Be Internally Inconsistent and Misleading’
the latest observations reported by the IPCC proves that the climate seems to be less sensitive to changes in the greenhouse gas increases than the previous IPCC report indicated.
OK. This is well and good; now the IPCC’s new estimates are reflecting the latest science.
Unfortunately, the IPCC’s climate models are not.
If we examine the climate models chosen by the IPCC to make their projections of future climate change resulting from human greenhouse gas (and particulate) emissions, we find that instead of using models with a 20 percent lower transient climate sensitivity, the transient sensitivity of the models used by the IPCC isthe same in the AR5 as in the AR4.
This has two serious implications.
First is that the climate models using by the IPCC are running behind the latest science, and secondly, and quite significantly, the climate models used by the IPCC produce too much warming for a given rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. This means the climate model projections, which make up the meat of the IPCC Assessment Report (and upon which policy decisions the world around are based), are substantially overheating.
The IPCC implicitly admits this fact through its own numbers.
Now, if only they would admit this explicitly. Then we’d be getting somewhere. But, while they may pay small lip service noting things might not be all right, don’t hold your breath waiting for the IPCC to say “we goofed.”…
Reuters: Skeptics pummel Al Gore & IPCC chief Pachauri into ‘faded’ stars: The ‘glamor’ has gone’ – ‘We need new voices’ — ‘Gore has been worn down by criticisms, especially by U.S. Republicans who say his climate campaigns are alarmist and question the science behind them’
Climate Change Stars Fade, Even If Risks Rise
September 26, 2013
Both Gore, the IPCC and Pachauri, now 73, won a series of international awards for their work in 2007. Gore’s movie, An Inconvenient Truth, won an Oscar and standing applause at U.N. negotiating sessions when it was shown. But Gore has also been worn down by criticisms, especially by U.S. Republicans who say his climate campaigns are alarmist and question the science behind them. His later ventures have been less high profile. He sold his struggling cable channel, Current TV, to Al Jazeera in January. Gore’s latest book, The Future: Six Drivers of Global Change, has won good reviews.
IPCC leaders including Pachauri have been less outspoken in recent months than before the 2007 report by the IPCC when he said, for instance, that he hoped it would “shock” the world into action.
A 2010 review by scientists in the InterAcademy Council (IAC), partly spurred by an error in the IPCC report that exaggerated a thaw in the Himalayas, said that IPCC leaders should stick to science and not recommend policies. “Straying into advocacy can only hurt IPCC’s credibility,” it said.
…