Next IPCC report will ‘scare the wits out of everyone’

Mr De Boer said “That report is going to scare the wits out of everyone, I’m confident those scientific findings will create new political momentum.”
Does this mean they’ve found the Caps Lock key?
I expect that statement says quite a lot about what will be left out of AR5 as much as anything.

In reply to Gondo says:
November 7, 2012 at 11:12 am
The Arctic changes are scary. Greenland has lost 3000km3 of ice since 1995 (the ice-sheet was in balance before that) and the continuing collapse in sea ice volume is bewildering. This years huge surface melt in GReenland is a symptom that the mass-loss is continuing. It’s scary that there are still wingnut morans who think that the Arctic is not warming up!
Gondo,
Your fears can be assuaged. The planet is about to cool. The ice core data proxy data indicates the ice sheets warms and cools cyclically with the Greenland ice sheet warming and the Antarctic ice sheet cooling or vise versa which paleoclimatologists call the polar see saw. The next cooling cycle appears to be a special Bond type event (the once every 1500 year cooling cycle or a Heinrich event.)
The following is a link to a paper by Svensmark that explains the mechanism.
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0612145v1
The Antarctic climate anomaly and galactic cosmic rays
Borehole temperatures in the ice sheets spanning the past 6000 years show Antarctica repeatedly warming when Greenland cooled, and vice versa (Fig. 1) [13, 14]. North-south oscillations of greater amplitude associated with Dansgaard-Oeschger events are evident in oxygenisotope data from the Wurm-Wisconsin glaciation[15]. The phenomenon has been called the polar see-saw[15, 16], but that implies a north-south symmetry that is absent. Greenland is better coupled to global temperatures than Antarctica is, and the fulcrum of the temperature swings is near the Antarctic Circle. A more apt term for the effect is the Antarctic climate anomaly.
Attempts to account for it have included the hypothesis of a south-flowing warm ocean current crossing the Equator[17] with a built-in time lag supposedly intended to match paleoclimatic data. That there is no significant delay in the Antarctic climate anomaly is already apparent at the high-frequency end of Fig. (1). While mechanisms involving ocean currents might help to intensify or reverse the effects of climate changes, they are too slow to explain the almost instantaneous operation of the Antarctic climate anomaly.
Figure (2a) also shows that the polar warming effect of clouds is not symmetrical, being most pronounced beyond 75◦S. In the Arctic it does no more than offset the cooling effect, despite the fact that the Arctic is much cloudier than the Antarctic (Fig. (2b)). The main reason for the difference seems to be the exceptionally high albedo of Antarctica in the absence of clouds.
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2003/2003GL017115.shtml
Timing of abrupt climate change: A precise clock by Stefan Rahmstorf
Many paleoclimatic data reveal a approx. 1,500 year cyclicity of unknown origin. A crucial question is how stable and regular this cycle is. An analysis of the GISP2 ice core record from Greenland reveals that abrupt climate events appear to be paced by a 1,470-year cycle with a period that is probably stable to within a few percent; with 95% confidence the period is maintained to better than 12% over at least 23 cycles. This highly precise clock points to an origin outside the Earth system; oscillatory modes within the Earth system can be expected to be far more irregular in period.

Howskepticalment says:
November 7, 2012 at 4:14 pm
You may have forgotten that the Australian Opposition Leader has a Climate Action Plan which has exactly the same 2020 target in CO2 emission reductions as the current Australian Government. This will be funded from general revenue (that is from all taxes rather than from a specific tax).
If I recall it correctly, the Opposition has costed their CAP at around $20 billion – all to be raised from taxes because the CAP lacks completely a user-pays source.
[more ….]

You’re correct, I’m very out of touch with the specifics there. However, once in office, I wouldn’t trust him to keep to that pledge. Most likely, he’ll fudge things so he can get away with doing the minimum. Certainly his party’s victory would be viewed, around the world, as a defeat for warmism, since the carbon tax was/is such a big deal there.

BTW, the election may be in February but there is no reason for the Government to go early: inflation is within the target range (5%<6%, the Government's tax take as a proportion of GDP is the lowest it has been for decades <23%, the economy is growing at the fastest or equal fastest rate in the OECD and Government debt as a percentage of GDP is around the lowest in the OECD; interest rates are the lower than what this Government inherited from the previous Government: a set of figures most OECD governments would die for.

I’ve read that there’s quite a housing bubble there, just waiting to be burst when a global recession gets going, which it will.

Contrary to the cries of the economic alarmists Australia’s carbon tax does not appear to have destroyed these good figures.

Yet. (Isn’t the current gov’t. backpedaling a bit on implementing its tax, or rejiggering it somehow?)

August 2013 or September 2013 are more likely dates for the next Federal election in Australia.

I’d read here that the election was scheduled for February. Oops. (I should have realized that Feb. would be too soon after the previous election.)