Tag Archives: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)

GCM-models over estimate climate sensitivity

J. KAUPPINEN AND P. MALMI, NO EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE FOR THE SIGNIFICANT ANTHROPOGENIC CLIMATE CHANGE. 

In this paper we will prove that GCM-models used in IPCC report AR5 fail to calculate the influences of the low cloud cover changes on the global temperature. That is why those models give a very small natural temperature change leaving a very large change for the contribution of the green house gases in the observed temperature. This is the reason why IPCC has to use a very large sensitivity to compensate a too small natural component. Further they have to leave out the strong negative feedback due to the clouds in order to magnify the sensitivity. In addition, this paper proves that the changes in the low cloud cover fraction practically control the global temperature. click here

IPCC “changing Gulf Stream” orthodoxy falsified.

“A huge circulation pattern in the Atlantic Ocean took a starring role in the 2004 movie “The Day After Tomorrow.” In that fictional tale the global oceanic current suddenly stops and New York City freezes over. While many aspects of the movie are unrealistic, oceanographers are concerned about the long-term stability of the Atlantic Ocean circulation, and previous studies show that it has slowed dramatically in the past decade. New research from the University of Washington and the Ocean University of China finds the slowdown is not caused by global warming but is part of regular, decades-long cycle that will affect temperatures in coming decades.” click here

Brazil leads the way back to climate reality

“In Brazil, President Jair Bolsonaro is “dismantling” environmental agencies and missions. Brazil pulled out of hosting the 2019 U.N. climate summit, and has now canceled a United Nations climate change event that was to be held in August.” click here

Scientific facts about CO2

“The consistent pattern of the IPCC reveals demonization and misrepresentations of CO2. Here are some basic facts about CO2 that illustrate the discrepancy between what the IPCC claim and what science knows.” click here

Pursue goals like sustainable development and poverty eradication on their own merits (and not based on inadequate climate science)

Conclusions

“The SR1.5 report represents a very significant departure from previous IPCC reports in the direction of increased alarm regarding global warming, particularly as compared with the Fifth Assessment. No rigorous justification for this departure has been provided.

In reality, since the Fifth Assessment considerable evidence has accumulated suggesting that global warming is more of a long-term threat than a planetary emergency. This evidence consists mainly of observational results suggesting lower climate sensitivity (i.e. less warming in response to any given increase in greenhouse gas concentrations) and results indicating a greater contribution from natural variability to explaining observed global temperature trends. The IPCC has not passed on this evidence to policymakers in its SR1.5 report.

The report has also not passed on to policymakers some very important information published by climate modellers since the last IPCC assessment report regarding the empirical tuning of climate models to achieve desired results. The failure of previous IPCC reports to document the models’ tuning procedures has been described by these modellers as a ‘lack of transparency’. The projections of future warming published by the IPCC are completely dependent on the reliability of these models.

In view of these deficiencies, the SR1.5 report does not merit being regarded by policymakers as a scientifically rigorous document. There is much recent scientific evidence, not referred to in the report, to support a more considered mitigation strategy than the extreme measures proposed in the report.

Meanwhile, the worthy goals discussed in the report, such as sustainable development, poverty eradication and reducing inequalities, should be pursued on their own merits and not made dependent on unsettled climate science.”

US temperature extremes have become more moderate

“Chapter 6 – Temperature Changes in the United States of the U.S. Global Change Research Program’s recently published Climate Science Special Report (2017) clearly shows and discusses, under the heading of “6.1.2 Temperature Extremes”, how temperature extremes for the contiguous United States have become more moderate over the last 118 years, with the coldest daily temperatures warming and the warmest daily temperatures cooling. In other words, temperature-extreme-related climate in the United States has improved.” click here

UN climate report biased against nuclear power

“We are writing as scientists, scholars, and concerned citizens to warn you of a persistent anti-nuclear bias in the recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report on keeping global temperatures from rising 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels.[1]” click here