Wednesday, October 2, 2013

Back at Ya, IPCC: ‘Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science’ (Part II)

“There is no longer any getting around it. What we are dealing with here is nothing short of massive and systematic fraud. The IPCC and Political-Scientific-Environmentalist-Industrialist Climate Complex are deliberately and dishonestly taking billions in hard-earned taxpayer and consumer dollars – and using it to devise computer models, horror movie disaster scenarios, bogus official reports and countless “studies” purporting to link every imaginable event or oddity to human carbon dioxide emissions.”

The updated edition of Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) – Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science – makes a compelling case that the computer models, hypotheses, and policy prescriptions of the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are at odds with reality.

The 1,018-page report systematically debunks IPCC claims that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions are causing “dangerous” global warming/climate change – and that computer models can be relied on as a credible basis for alarming climate forecasts and scenarios.

The 14-page NIPCC Summary for Policymakers is illuminating and easy to understand. It should be read by legislators, regulators, journalists and anyone interested in climate change science.

Exaggeration Unmasked

The report makes it clear that the UN climate project has greatly exaggerated the amount of warming that is likely to occur if atmospheric CO2 concentrations were to double, to around 800 ppm (0.08%).

Moreover, moderate warning up to 2 degrees C (3.6 degrees F) would cause no net harm to the environment or human well-being. Indeed, it would likely be beneficial, lengthening growing seasons and expanding croplands and many wildlife habitats, especially since more carbon dioxide would help plants grow faster and better, even under adverse conditions like pollution, limited water or high temperatures. By contrast, even 2 degrees C of cooling could be disastrous for agriculture and efforts to feed growing human populations, without plowing under more habitats.

The NIPCC also destroys the false IPCC claims that computer models “prove” recent global warming is due to human CO2 emissions, and can forecast future global temperatures, climates and events. In reality, the models greatly exaggerate climate sensitivity to carbon dioxide levels; assume all warming since the industrial revolution began are due to human carbon dioxide; input data contaminated by urban heat island effects; and rely on simplistic configurations of vital drivers of Earth’s climate system (or simply ignore them), such as solar variations, cosmic ray fluxes, winds, clouds, precipitation, volcanoes, ocean currents and recurrent phenomena like the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (El Nino and La Nina).

This is garbage-in, garbage-out (or Malthus-in, Malthus-out) at its worst: Faulty assumptions, faulty data, faulty codes and algorithms, simplistic analytical methodologies and other GIGO.

The NIPCC authors conclude that existing climate models “should therefore not be used to guide public policy formulation, until they have been validated [by comparison to actual observations] and shown to have predictive value.” And yet, the deficient models are being used: to justify policies, laws and regulations that stigmatize and penalize hydrocarbon use, promote and subsidize wind and solar energy, and have hugely negative effects on jobs, family energy bills, the overall economy, and people’s lives.

Countries are spending countless billions of dollars annually on faulty to fraudulent IPCC climate models and studies that purport to link every adverse event or problem to manmade climate change; subsidized renewable energy programs that displace food crops and kill wildlife; adaptation and mitigation measures against future disasters that exist only in “scenarios” generated by the IPCC’s GIGO computer models; and welfare, food stamp and energy assistance programs for the newly unemployed and impoverished. Equally bad, they are losing tens of billions in royalty, tax and other revenue that they would receive if they were not blocking oil, gas and coal development and use – and destroying manufacturing jobs that depend on cheap, reliable energy, so that companies can compete in international marketplaces.

Beware of IPCC Spin–and Note One ‘Remarkable Graph’

The latest IPCC report  will be released in a week or so. However, Ross McKitrick and other analysts have reviewed and debunked a leaked semi-final draft. That draft reveals that even the IPCC has had to acknowledge problems with its models, temperature forecasts and predictions of planetary disaster.

As McKitrick observes in a hard-hitting Financial Post article, “Everything you need to know about the dilemma the IPCC faces is summed up in one remarkable graph.”

The graph dramatically shows that every UN IPCC climate model over the past 22 years (1990-2012) predicted that average global temperatures would be as much as 0.9 degrees C (1.6 degrees F) higher than they actually were! This is hardly surprising, considering how defective the models are, and how heavily they depend on the notion that carbon dioxide is the primary driver of global warming.

Notes McKitrick, chair of graduate studies at the University of Guelph (Ontario) Department of Economics: “What is commonly dismissed as the ‘skeptical’ or ‘denier’ view coincides with real-world observations.” We IPCC skeptics want evidence and observations to back up the hypotheses and predictions. Instead, when the observations don’t conform to the predictions, the IPCC ignores the data and trumpets the models, assertions and scary disaster scenarios.

Indeed, says McKitrick, the IPCC is in “full denial mode.” Despite its own graph screaming the opposite, the IPCC continues to insist that it has “very high confidence” that its models correctly represent the effects of rising atmospheric CO2 levels on global surface temperature trends; that it is “extremely likely” that “more than half” of the increase in global average surface temperatures between 1951 and 2010 were due to human influences; and that the planet will “continue” to warm catastrophically unless drastic actions are taken to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

Put another way, considering the 17-year pause in global temperature increases, the abject failure of the models, and the lower confidence levels expressed about other findings in the full IPCC report, increasing the confidence levels attributed to the models and human influences is “incomprehensible,” says Judith Curry, chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology.

The UN IPCC claims are patently ridiculous. It is commonly acknowledged that fully half of planetary warming during the twentieth century came during the first half, 1900–1950, which includes the 1930s and Dust Bowl years, when so many high temperature records were set, and before atmospheric carbon dioxide levels really began to climb. The period 1951–2010 includes not just two warming periods, but also the period when average global temperatures were falling, and scientists were “almost unanimous” that the cooling trend would reduce agricultural output for the rest of the century. Moreover, the planet can hardly “continue” to warm catastrophically if there has been no warming at all for 17 years, following a decade of cooling and a mere twenty years of mildwarming.

Alarmist Countries Show their Hands

It gets even worse. Confronted with all this truly disastrous news on the eve of their upcoming global warming summit, IPCC politicians, bureaucrats and environmentalists are trying to figure out how to cover up the bad news. Germany wants all references to the absence of warming deleted from the IPCC report. Whereas 20 years of mild warming were enough to demand immediate drastic action to avoid a climate cataclysm, now it says 17 years of no warming is too short and “misleading.”

Hungary doesn’t want the IPCC to give “deniers” more ammunition. Belgium wants the “world’s most authoritative climate body” to manipulate the data and graphs, by using a different starting year that cleverly creates a more noticeable upward temperature trend. The Obama Administration wants the IPCC to explain away the absence of warming, by saying the mysteriously missing atmospheric heat was somehow absorbed by the upper 1.2 miles of oceans waters, which have not actually warmed, according to ARGO project data, or perhaps somehow in the really deep ocean, where we have no data.

A Massive Fraud?

There is no longer any getting around it. What we are dealing with here is nothing short of massive and systematic fraud. The IPCC and Political-Scientific-Environmentalist-Industrialist Climate Complex are deliberately and dishonestly taking billions in hard-earned taxpayer and consumer dollars – and using it to devise computer models, horror movie disaster scenarios, bogus official reports and countless “studies” purporting to link every imaginable event or oddity to human carbon dioxide emissions.

These fraudulent materials are then used to justify policies, laws, regulations and agendas that enrich and empower the Climate Complex – but send energy prices skyrocketing, cripple economies, destroy jobs, kill millions of birds and bats every year, and cause the premature death of thousands of people who are driven into fuel poverty or denied access to affordable, reliable modern heat and electricity.

These unethical, immoral actions can no longer be tolerated. They are too reminiscent of the lies, tactics, ethics and results of other infamous tyrannies. We cannot afford a new green or watermelon dictatorship.

Source: http://www.masterresource.org/2013/09/climate-change-reconsidered-ii/

electric contractors electrical repair commercial electric

No comments:

Post a Comment