• Home
  • /
  • Blog
  • /
  • The IPCC: On The Run At Last by Bob Carter
Uncategorized

The IPCC: On The Run At Last by Bob Carter

By jennifer
March 26, 2008

UN climate body in panic mode as satellite temperatures turn down and a hard winter lashes both hemispheres

A soprano thrillingly hits her top-A, sighs with relief at achieving the desired effect, and moves on. But not the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) whose climate alarmism started to crescendo in 2001 in the Third Assessment Report (3AR) with the statement that “most of the observed warming over the last 50 years is likely (>66% probable) to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations”.

Recently, in their Fourth Assessment Report (4AR), and faced with their failure to convince the public that the sky is falling, the IPCC delivers even more preposterous advice in ever shriller tones, saying that “Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely (>90% probable) due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations”. The wobble around top-A is clearly discernible.

The press, most of whom have firmly identified with the alarmist cause, continues to appease the Green gods by faithfully running IPCC’s now unrealistic scientific propaganda, thereby stoking public alarm; the science is a done deal, they say, and the time has come to stop talking. According to UK journalist, Geoffrey Lean, all that is lacking to solve the global warming “crisis” is political will from governments.

Well, thank the Lord for that lack. For the IPCC’s 2007 final Summary for Policymakers shows that the climate alarmists are at last on the run. Their evidence for dangerous, human-caused global warming, always slim, now lies exposed in tatters for all to see.

In contrast, the alternative, persuasive and non-alarmist view of climate change is well summarized in two recently issued and readily available documents. The first is a letter to the Secretary General of the United Nations, which was released at the UN’s Bali conference last December, supported by the signatures of 103 eminent professional persons. The second is the Manhattan Declaration on Climate Change, the release of which coincided with the launch of the International Climate Science Coalition at a major climate rationalist conference in New York in early March.

The evidence for dangerous global warming adduced by the IPCC has never been strong on empirical science. Endless circumstantial scare campaigns have been run about melting glaciers, more droughts and storms and floods, sea-level rise and polar bears, but all founder on one inescapable problem – as does Mr. Al Gore’s over-hyped science fiction film. And that is that we live on a naturally variable planet. Change is what planet Earth does on all scales, and so far not one of the alleged effects of human-caused global warming has been shown to lie outside normal planetary variation. Sea-level rising? Sure, it happens. And the appropriate response is adaptation, as the Dutch have known for centuries.

Stuck with the absence of empirical evidence for dangerous warming or abnormal change, in 2001 the IPCC turned to graphmanship, giving prominence in its 3AR to the so-called “hockey-stick” record of temperature over the last 1000 years. The hockey-stick graphic, which appeared to show dramatic increases of temperature during the 20th century compared with earlier times, has now been exposed as statistical chicanery and, thankfully, is nowhere to be seen in the 4AR.

No hockey-stick and no empirical evidence, what is a man to do? Well, obviously, turn to virtual reality rather than real reality: PlayStation 4 here we come.

The IPCC’s expensive and complex computer models can be programmed to produce any desired result, and it is therefore not surprising that they uniformly predict warming since 1990. Meanwhile, the real-world global average temperature has stubbornly refused to obey this stricture. It exhibits no significant increase since 1998, and the preliminary 2007 year-end temperature confirms the continuation of a temperature plateau since 1998 to which is now appended a cooling trend over the last 3 years.

Is global cooling next?

“Best fit” of yearly average temperature

Lower atmosphere global temperature differences (0C) from 1979 – 1998 average

untitled.bmp

“Global warming theory indicates that temperature rise due to increasing carbon dioxide emissions should be most prominent at heights of 5-10 km in the lower atmosphere; instead, more warming is occurring at the surface. For the lower atmosphere, the satellite data indicate that, since the 1998 El Nino when temperatures spiked 10C due to a rise in water vapour emissions (the principal “greenhouse gas”), global temperatures dropped sharply, then stabilized and now show signs of continuing down - is global cooling next? (data courtesy of Professors John Christy and Roy Spencer, University of Alabama , Huntsville ; a best-fitted spline curve represents longer term temperature trends).”

Read the entire Canada Free Press article here.

Dr. Bob Carter is a Research Professor at James Cook University, Queensland, Australia, who studies ancient environments and climate, and whose website is at http://members.iinet.net.au/~glrmc/new_page_1.htm

Good Causes

Comments

  1. Trend Line 1870-2007

    Better still try trend line 11500 BP to Present the orbital factors come into play and there is a clear .14 / millennium downward trend.

  2. Neil B - Can't see any link but I can imagine what you're trying to get at! So explain:

    1) The warming up to the 1940's when there was little increase in atmospheric CO2
    2) The cooling from the mid 1940's to the mid 1970's (and please non of that aerosol crap!)
    and after taking volcanic effects into account
    3) The step-type jump in temperatures from the mid-70's to the early-80's.
    4) The plateau in temperature since the early-80's.

  3. Try this graph and trendline:
    Trend Line 1870-2007
    There's a clear upward climb.
    REM that theoretical properties of CO2 absorption in IR are of crucial importance; we're not watching results in a causal vacuum.

  4. Mark: After all, they are products of the modern industrial world that you seem so much to despise!

    I'm wondering if he has CO2 monitors to sell.

  5. Gavin: "Forgetting which thread this applies to for a mo, Marks link above on carbon in emissions is hardly news to some."

    Well apparently it's news to the IPCC whose position in AR4 was substantially different.

    And in terms of relevance to this thread it's very relevant! The IPCC as Bob Carter states is clearly "on the run" as the fraud of the pseudoscience it presents as fact is exposed.

    Remember that AR4 clearly states "Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is VERY LIKELY due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations". (VERY LIKELY = 90%+ certainty by IPCC definition).

    And as to your other comments: "Mark: The greatest fraud begins with business, its finance, material resources, quality control etc." & "Life in any human operation is a fudge like astrology.", christ it's no wonder you're a lefty envirofreak. Why don't you get off your computer and the internet and go and live in a cave. After all, they are products of the modern industrial world that you seem so much to despise!

  6. Forgetting which thread this applies to for a mo, Marks link above on carbon in emissions is hardly news to some.

    In post WW2 manufacturing we gradually changed from just measuring efficiency to considering customers and our neighbourhoods however monitoring CO2 in flue gas was dropped in favour of O2 measurements. As a result carbon black largely disappeared from the effluent of large scale furnace operations. Simultaneously a similar campaign in the automotive industry cleaned up a lot of vehicle smoke and visual pollution over most western cities declined considerably.

    Diesel engines were somewhat exempt from this change as pure carbon from the exhaust was not considered toxic back then.

    Although it was a problem for washing hanging on the line overnight carbon in smog was not the target of our first clean air campaigns. Neither was coal dust. Fine carbon continued to go round the world under the radar.

  7. Mark: The greatest fraud begins with business, its finance, material resources, quality control etc. Another source of global fraud is peddlers of religion, politics, health practices, and fashion. Compared to our book sellers and most other media, scientists and teachers are poorly organised.

    The first issue for an individual is who do you trust?

    Now I don’t bother with Andrew Bolt or The Australian except for a smile. If I want to know about the weather or a product I go to their home page or use the phone however there is nothing as good as say using a camera on the beach after you have dropped it on the beach to know what’s up with what we all do most of the time.

    Life in any human operation is a fudge like astrology.

  8. Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary

    Fraud: "an act of deceiving or misrepresenting"

    From the alarmist taking heads (Gore, Hansen, Suzuki, et. al.):

    "The science is settled"
    "The debate is over"
    "We are close to the tipping point"
    "The relationship is complicated but one thing is clear, when there is more CO2 the temperature is higher"
    "If sea levels were to raise 20 feet this is what Florida would look like, and San FRancisco Bay, . . . ."

    I could go on and on.

    Looks like fraud to me!

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *