We’ve been admonished by others in the blogosphere when we report on record cold weather or record snow stories of interest by hurling the maxim: “weather is not climate“. Yet when the IPCC does that, linking specific weather events in the IPCC AR4 report, such as a single heatwave, the same people have no complaints. As Davis Rose on the Times reports, the IPCC, under Pachauri’s leadership, botched that too. Now it looks like the IPCC will have to withdraw yet another part of the report.
Rose writes:
The new controversy also goes back to the IPCC’s 2007 report in which a separate section warned that the world had “suffered rapidly rising costs due to extreme weather-related events since the 1970s”.
The problem is that the IPCC cited a study on severe weather event frequency that wasn’t complete yet. When it was complete in 2008, it came to an entirely different conclusion about linkage to global warming:
The Sunday Times has since found that the scientific paper on which the IPCC based its claim had not been peer reviewed, nor published, at the time the climate body issued its report.
When the paper was eventually published, in 2008, it had a new caveat. It said: “We find insufficient evidence to claim a statistical relationship between global temperature increase and catastrophe losses.”
Despite this change the IPCC did not issue a clarification ahead of the Copenhagen climate summit last month. It has also emerged that at least two scientific reviewers who checked drafts of the IPCC report urged greater caution in proposing a link between climate change and disaster impacts — but were ignored.
Read the complete Times article here: UN wrongly linked global warming to natural disasters
As an example of citing a single weather event as being connected to “climate change”, we can look to the IPCC AR4 report online and find this citation about the 2003 heat wave in Europe:
And here is where the IPCC tries to link a single weather event to climate change aka global warming:
As such, the 2003 heatwave resembles simulations by regional climate models of summer temperatures in the latter part of the 21st century under the A2 scenario (Beniston, 2004). Anthropogenic warming may therefore already have increased the risk of heatwaves such as the one experienced in 2003 (Stott et al., 2004).
But, it’s apparently OK when peer reviewed scientists do it.
h/t to WUWT reader Dirk H for the IPCC reference.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Looks like global warming is fraying a bit around the edges.
If this keeps up, the MSM will be dragged kicking and screaming into reality and the politicians will no longer have that excuse for a revenue/resource grab.
AR 4 is propaganda, nothing more, nothing less.
Remember the illustrious British PM Gorgon McBruin telling us that the flooding oop north was due to climate change? When in fact it was “weather” coupled with man’s unerring ability of creating urban development in areas prone to flood. Running with the hare AND the hounds – you can’t have it both ways. And he calls us “flat-earthers”, and “unintelligent”.. It makes my blood boil, and I have dreams involving physical violence where his teeth accidentally strike my boot a number of times, your worship. Phew, thats better….
The politicians are going to start throwing the climate scientists under the bus soon, I predict.
Quick reaction, Anthony! 🙂
But Dr Landsea resigned in 2005!
They don’t want to listen. They won’t listen. So, they will be dragged kicking and screaming into listening.
Philosophical Question: How many rotten bricks does it take bring an edifice down?
Just vote. After 30 years living in California and not voting, I’m going to go through the pain in the @rse of registering to vote in the UK. I have no idea who I’m going to vote for. I’m registering purely to vote against that unelected freak.
I will be more than one vote too … I’m betting my position will get another 50 or 100 voting with me, maybe even a bigger chain reaction.
Given Lord Monckton’s position, I think it will be UKIP.
Soon they’ll be reduced to claiming the sun rising in the east is irrefutable proof of AGW. It’s about the only thing they can’t goof on at this stage.
The massive IPCC scam demands a class action either against the panel itself or its frudulent representatives, best filed in the US as they have the legal system that best punishes deliberate misrepresentation. Wattsupwiththat is probably the best forum to organize such a claim in view of the wide reach of readers. It also demands immediate resignation of the IPCC board who have proven to be in want of the most basic scientific integrity. They are a complete failure given that they are a panel to serve the nations of this world, not to deceive them.
There should be some intelligent attourney amoung the readers of this site who can translate this fraud in legal relevant claims and hit the guilty in their wallet or maybe even initiate penal law repercursions.
Wow! Does this mean Al Gore needs to be admonished too! OMG! The father of “Global Warming”, oh wait, “Climate Change”, oh wait, “Ocean Acidification”…
When it rains it pours.
It’s raining buckets on the IPCC right now.
“… As Mill observes here, self-deception can interfere with the application of any standard of morality. For any standard that exists, no matter how rigid or precise, there is always the possibility that it will be misapplied as a result of self-deception. What we can conclude from this, according to Mill, is that the cause of the misapplication is not the standard itself, but the complexity of human affairs and our great capacity for self-deception.” (From “Ethics and Self-Deception” Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy http://www.iep.utm.edu/eth-self/#H3)
The philosophers are all to kind. I must admit I view these actions from a much more cynical point of view. This writer lacks the talent of a Mencken or Twain. I have no glib comment to offer. I think they know perfectly well when they play fast and loose with the ethics and morality that lay at the foundations of the Philosophy of Science. I think what is most unsettling to me the arrogance of Mythos that replaces the humility of Logos.
The Telegraph and Times in the UK are reporting the IPCC failings and Pachauri’s misdoings (I’m being very polite here). Barely a peep from the BBC. The only mention is a buried away item last week by Richard Black (the alarmist correspondent mate of Mann from Climategate) who has an article that of course ends with “But its overall conclusion that global warming is “unequivocal” remains beyond reproach, he said. “
Another wasted NPP
what do you want to bet that the CAGW will say the same thing about all of the tornadoes coming this spring. Had 14 on the 20th, 12 on the 21st, 3 on the 22nd, and a major outbreak coming as the Moon goes to Maximum North on the 27th, then heads south as the Earth has a heliocentric conjunction with Mars, which will add to the severity of the system.
Should be a fun next weekend, the CAGW people will be screaming all about more severe weather due to climate change BS. Tell them you heard it here first.
UN wrongly linked global warming to natural disaster, CO2 and then make false presumptions that they can also relay the apparent inherent cost each natural disaster encompasses. Rulers of the Universe indeed.
Three wheels on my wagon, but I keep rolling along.
Two wheels on my wagon…..
http://www.lyricsmode.com/lyrics/n/new_christy_minstrels/three_wheels_on_my_wagon.html
.
Moonbat in the UK Guardian is also silent on the imploding IPCC, instead he is giving out plastic cup awards. The comments are worth reading to show the wind of change.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2010/jan/21/christopher-booker-prize-climate-change-scepticism
In the mean time,
Pielke Jr.reports on alterations of the Stern Review Report.
http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/2010/01/what-tangled-web-we-weave.html
Edmund Burke (11:30:42) :
“Soon they’ll be reduced to claiming the sun rising in the east is irrefutable proof of AGW. It’s about the only thing they can’t goof on at this stage.”
Unless of course they use their moral compass to determine East and West.
It’s no surprise that this stuff is all slowly starting to surface…
The AR4 is chalked full with opinion, assumption, and speculation. Most of the so-called science in it does not carry actual evidentiary causation… just assumption of correlation.
This is not how any other scientific discipline carries out its methodology and conclusions.
More and more will continue to surface regarding the AR4 opinionated propaganda piece.
And then we will get the pleasure of sitting back and watching as the rats jump ship, one by one… back peddling and covering their tracks.
Have the IPCC ever given a scientific definition of when weather becomes climate that we can hold them to.?
p.s. I know all the jokes of when its hot its climate and when its cold its weather.
If there are no consequences, no bad weather events and not much ice in particular melting, whatever will they invent to make a fuzz about in the next IPCC report? 🙂
Nemesis>> I believe a common definition of climate is the average weather of 30 years or more.