IPCC AR5 Renews Demands For Governments Buy Their Climate Change Pig In A Poke

Guest essay by Dr. Tim Ball

Buying “a pig in a poke” refers to buying an unseen piglet in a sack. The piglet was actually a cat, so when you opened the sack after purchase “the cat was out of the bag.”

Governments bought the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) ‘pig’ ‘that human CO2 was causing global warming wrapped in the ‘poke’ of their Reports. IPCC assured buyers it was a pig with 90+ percent certainty.

They fooled governments and media four times now they offer a new poke in Assessment Report 5 (AR5), but with 95 percent certainty it’s a pig. This is despite the fact that the cat is already out of the bag. Their predictions have failed. For 17 years global temperatures have declined while CO2 levels continue to increase. Arctic summer ice, supposedly all gone by 2013 has recovered by 60 percent in one year. Severe weather has not increased. Damage done by policies already implemented, such as green jobs and alternate energies, is already evident. Newspaper coverage declined dramatically as people sense problems even if they don’t understand (Figure 1). Decline followed the peak created by Gore’s false fantasy An Inconvenient Truth.

2000-2013_climate_coverage

Figure 1

Instead of acknowledging error, the IPCC [tries] to defend the indefensible. This alone warrants disbanding of the agency. 

They’re in a corner of their own design. They manufactured the poke through an organization, process, and computer models designed to prove their claim. Now we know it contains a cat. More frightening for them, people, including governments, are asking questions. A report by German scientists showing 65 climate models failed to predict the current no temperature increase period caused EU and US governments to ask questions.

“U.S. and European Union envoys are seeking more clarity from the United Nations on a slowdown in global warming that climate skeptics have cited as a reason not to “panic” about environmental changes, leaked documents show.”

To admit this the IPCC would expose their fraud. This includes ignoring the scientific method, changing terminology by switching from global warming to climate change and flooding the media with misleading stories about connections between natural events and their claims. AR5 indicates the has IPCC decided not to admit their deceit. Consider the problem for governments and people as a investment decision.

Would you invest time, money, and political capital in responding to a demand for total global action based on 23 years of failed predictions?

Would you take action when the few countries and regions who pursued the proposed remedial action of green jobs and alternate energy already prove it doesn’t work.

Would you even listen if you learned that:

• Their research of global warming/climate change was deliberately narrowed by definition to only studying human causes.

• You cannot determine human causes if you don’t know or understand natural causes.

• The demand for political action was based on an untested hypothesis.

• The standard scientific methods and tests of the hypothesis were ignored.

• Computer models were created to produce the predetermined outcome.

• All predictions made for 23 years were wrong.

• After five years they abandoned calling them predictions and opted for the term projections.

• Projections were created with low, medium and high potential scenarios.

• Even the low projections were greater than what actually occurred.

• Their claims of increased severe weather events proved wrong.

• Their claims of sea level rise were incorrect.

• The actual record since 1998 shows temperatures leveling and declining while CO2 increased.

• Instead of admitting their hypothesis was wrong and amending or rejecting it, as science requires, they changed the hypothesis from global warming to climate change.

• Instead of admitting their claim of 90+ percent certainty that human CO2 was the cause was wrong, they raised the claim to 95 percent certainty.

Would you invest in a plan promoted using a Report deliberately created to exaggerate and distort actual results. Their Science Report acknowledges all the severe limitations of their knowledge about climate and climate change. It itemizes the severe limitations of their climate models. However, they know most won’t read or understand what it says. Just in case they do they deliberately release a doctored report called the Summary for Policymakers (SPM) months before they release the Science Report.

As David Wojick, UN IPCC expert reviewer, explained

…What is systematically omitted from the SPM are precisely the uncertainties and positive counter evidence that might negate the human interference theory. Instead of assessing these objections, the Summary confidently asserts just those findings that support its case. In short, this is advocacy, not assessment.

The IPCC already sold four pigs in pokes in 1990, 1995, 2001 and 2007 Reports. Distortions, deceptions and deliberately falsified data was used. The most infamous was the “hockey stick”, which literally rewrote climate history, in the 2001 Report. Corruption was exposed in leaked emails of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU), whose members dominated the IPCC.

AR5 SPM is scheduled for approval in Stockholm at the end of September for release shortly thereafter. If you’re tempted to buy consider German physicist and meteorologist Klaus-Eckart Plus comments about the IPCC pig in a poke.

“Ten years ago I simply parroted what the IPCC told us. One day I started checking the facts and data – first I started with a sense of doubt but then I became outraged when I discovered that much of what the IPCC and the media were telling us was sheer nonsense and was not even supported by any scientific facts and measurements. To this day I still feel shame that as a scientist I made presentations of their science without first checking it.”

It is time for global outrage and accountability.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
70 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
September 13, 2013 3:15 pm

I love the analogy of a pig in a poke, and cat out of the bag – genius

September 13, 2013 3:17 pm

You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.
You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.
Abraham Lincoln

richardscourtney
September 13, 2013 3:36 pm

Rogerio Maestri:
re your post at September 13, 2013 at 3:17 pm.
I think the version of PT Barnum is more appropriate: i.e.
You can fool some of the people all of the time, and that’s enough to make a living.
Richard

Tagerbaek
September 13, 2013 3:37 pm

Refreshing to hear someone tell it like is, no ifs and buts and maybes.
The truth, I think, is that most people don’t give a flying f… about climate or the science, but they are beginning to smell a rat, and they are beginning to understand the astronomical costs and utter uselessness of the unicorn projects started by our idiot politicians.
It won’t be long now before it’s all over.

Wyguy
September 13, 2013 3:47 pm

Saw this on Powerline blog. With two weeks to go until the slow rollout of the next IPCC climate science report begins, there’s a fresh embarrassment for the climateers from right inside their own camp: a Nature Climate Change article entitled:
“Overestimated global warming over the past 20 years.”

hunter
September 13, 2013 3:52 pm

The turmoil in the Middle East is due in no small part to high food prices. High food prices are due to high grain prices. High grain prices are due to tight supplies created by the climate policy of using food grains for fuel instead of food.
So in a real sense the disasters taking place in Egypt, Libya, Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East are due to the policy demands of climate extremists.

angech
September 13, 2013 4:18 pm

On a lighter note NSICD site down to weather and flooding. Who would have predicted that?
Or should they have?

ROM
September 13, 2013 4:20 pm

I have always been somewhat nonplussed at the IPCC’s three Projections for low, medium and high potential CO2 scenarios.
Meaning the supposed climate outcomes for three adjoining and increasing levels of CO2 as we move into the far future.
Those three projections linked to three bands of increasing CO2 levels cover the full range of supposed outcomes up to about 6 C. increase in global temperatures by late in the 21st century .
The IPCC’s apparent need for three adjoining and increasing CO2 projections to cover it’s arse in every potential future situation completely negates any claims by the IPCC that it can predict or project future CO2 levels and the supposed consequent future climate outcomes.
For the life of me, what earthly use are such sequential CO2 and temperature projections with all possibility’s likely, to a politician and his / her advisers when they are trying to set policy?
What strategy other than throwing a dart at the entire board of the IPCC’s projections can the politicals follow to arrive at what they might perhaps suppose to be the best and correct outcome when every possibility is covered by those three projections?
For the politicians and policy creation the overlapping three projection scenario’s create a situation where they really haven’t a clue as to which projection is the correct or most likely possibility
In that case the whole IPCC exercise is worse than useless. It is extremely dangerous, far more so than if no such body as the IPCC was ever created as it gives both an utterly wrong impression that the future of the global climate can be predicted and a dangerously misplaced sense that something can be done about that future by taking certain actions.
And when the future resolves itself to something completely different in outcome to that accepted by the politicals based on one of the chosen IPCC projections , the actions taken could in the future prove instead of helping, to be very damaging and extremely serious in consequences for a very large number of Earth’s citizens.
Exactly as we are seeing with the increasing unaffordability of the deliberately and artificially created increasing cost of energy.
Energy that keeps people warm, comfortable and fed and energy that drives productivity and creates employment and increases standards of living.
But now we have increasingly unaffordable energy for an increasing number of citizens all due entirely to the corrupted science and policy advocacy of a corrupt and biased CAGW advocacy touting IPCC.
And a global climate where despite all the sacrifice made by so many at the counseling and insistence of the IPCC and it’s adherents has made not one single iota of detectable difference to the patterns and trends of the global climate.
Above all the IPCC has become quite dangerous because it promises much and that “much” has proven to be totally wrong and extremely damaging to people, to nations, to the political systems and the consequent instabilities and deep financial problems created in many nations implementing the IPCC’s reccomendations and the global environment with bio-fuels, wind turbines and etc

Jimbo
September 13, 2013 4:22 pm

AR5 is a DEAD PARROT.

Monty Python – Dead Parrot Sketch – 1969
‘E’s not pinin’! ‘E’s passed on! This parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! ‘E’s expired and gone to meet ‘is maker! ‘E’s a stiff! Bereft of life, ‘e rests in peace! If you hadn’t nailed ‘im to the perch ‘e’d be pushing up the daisies! ‘Is metabolic processes are now ‘istory! ‘E’s off the twig! ‘E’s kicked the bucket, ‘e’s shuffled off ‘is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin’ choir invisible!! THIS IS AN EX-PARROT!!

AR5 has been shafted by the recent deluge of knob reducing climate sensitivity papers. When will this charade be over!

DesertYote
September 13, 2013 4:47 pm

Mark says:
September 13, 2013 at 12:54 pm
Governments don’t buy what the IPCC is selling. The IPCC reports what politicians order it to in order to advance the their political agendas and everybody involved gets rich at our expense.
###
Wrong! Its not about money but power. Money and power are not the same thing. They have completely different “chemistry”. Your being rich does not negatively impact my being rich (it actually enhances it). You having power on the other hand is a direct threat to my power.

bw
September 13, 2013 5:05 pm

Tropical storm Sandy was not a hurricane at landfall. Sustained wind speeds actually measured at the surface were well below the threshold that qualifies for the term hurricane.
NOAA declarations are based on aircraft estimates, and are usually over-stated.

Bill Illis
September 13, 2013 5:09 pm

The theory of global warming is between 50% to 75% exaggerated/wrong.
It is that simple.
25% to 50% right means it is not a big enough problem that we have to do anything about it.
It is that simple.

Chuck Nolan
September 13, 2013 5:15 pm

Rogerio Maestri says:
September 13, 2013 at 3:17 pm
You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.
You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.
Abraham Lincoln
—————————————————————————–
“I’ll let you be in my dream if I can be in yours.”
Bob Dylan said that.

September 13, 2013 5:18 pm

Here is my slightly edited (removing Australia) reply that was a response on WUWT about Australia’s now defunct approach about 2 and a half years ago:
_______________________________
GOVT: “We have bought a pig.”
Concerned Taxpayer: “That is a poke. How do you know there is a pig in it?”
GOVT: “We have bought a pig. The pig is within the poke. We have a consensus about the pig, so there is no need to check inside.”
Concerned Taxpayer: “Fifty BILLION dollars of taxpayer monies will be paid for this particular pig – wouldn’t it be fiscally prudent to verify the quality of the pig that is, supposedly, in the poke?
GOVT: “We have bought a pig. The pig is within the poke. Your questions are very troubling – are you questioning the Govt.? You should take our word for it – we are very smart and talented and we have in mind the best interests of the planet and all the creatures on it. And we have a consensus about the pig, so we shall not waste any time checking inside the poke.”
Concerned Taxpayer: Of course, if the poke is opened and there isn’t a pig there or if the pig is of poor quality or undersized, I can understand that would be embarrassing to the Govt. and many wonderful people would then lose their very important Govt. jobs and that would certainly be a sad turn of events, however, I am willing to risk it to save fifty billion dollars of taxpayer’s monies. Open the poke and let us all see that there is a pig in it, please.”
GOVT: “We have bought a pig. The pig controls the weather. We shall control the pig and therefore we shall control the weather by default.”
Concerned Taxpayer: “Would you like to buy a bridge?”

Jeff Alberts
September 13, 2013 5:28 pm

“Now we know it contains a cat.”
Actually it contains a very poor computer model of a cat. One that looks suspiciously like a guy in a cat suit with a little sign that says “Mee-effing-ow!”

Crispin in Waterloo
September 13, 2013 5:43 pm

@Tim Ball
“Instead of admitting their claim of 90+ percent certainty that human CO2 was the cause was wrong, they raised the claim to 95 percent certainty.”
This is incorrect. Please read the AR5 statement carefully (and not people’s claims about the claim). It says that they are 95% certain that humans are responsible for “more than half” of the recent warming (excluding the most recent non-warming of course). This is a major change in ‘message’ that has largely gone unnoticed.
The previous (AR4) claim was that they were 90% certain that humans were responsible for ‘most’ of the recent warming.
90% certainty about most and 95% certain about half are very different claims. They have backed wa-ay off the earlier claim and will, in due course, say that of course point out they didn’t say, “95% confidence in most, read the report!”

September 13, 2013 5:45 pm

This from my blog . . . http://cartoonmick.wordpress.com/about/
This is a fictional tale and any relation to persons living today is purely coincidental.
THE FINAL CHAPTER
Prince Tony said climate change was “crap”, and he firmly believed any changes in Earth’s climate were not caused by human activity.
He was not concerned in our survival on Earth, as our immediate future did not appear to be at risk.
But he was interested in his own survival and immediate future at the helm of his powerful realm.
For him to survive, he must keep his “Powerful Big Business” friends happy by allowing them to continue polluting at a minimum cost to themselves.
He devised a fiendish plan, a solution for the happiness of his “Powerful Big Business” friends.
He would pay them to pollute.
Their continued pollution would not affect the earth’s climate, contrary to the opinions of the climate scientists who had not yet been arrested and imprisoned.
As the years went by, Prince Tony found it harder to breathe, but he was not worried, as all around him had similar problems.
The food shortages had not troubled him either, for there was enough left to feed those who had not yet drowned in the rising oceans.
He had authorised his “Powerful Big Business” friends to cut down and burn as many trees as they wished, regardless of the naysayers and increasing sand storms.
His “Powerful Big Business” friends suggested he not alarm himself over the eastern skies which became darker each day, as this was a minimal risk factor and would one day disappear.
Yet the dark clouds grew, the sun was rarely seen and people died from the cold whilst others starved to death.
Undeterred, Prince Tony, in his infinite wisdom, increased the taxes to raise more money to pay for his food and warmth.
But no monies came, there were no people left, no “Powerful Big Business”, for all had perished in the climate change which he believed was not of mankind’s making.
. . . . and as the dark clouds sank slowly in the west, our lonely Prince Tony finally realized that climate change was not “crap”, it was his plan which was “crap”.

thingadonta
September 13, 2013 5:47 pm

“You cannot determine human causes if you don’t know or understand natural causes”
The standard problem with conventional socialism, it’s completely hopeless at understanding nature…

u.k.(us)
September 13, 2013 5:47 pm

In science, the term observer effect means that the act of observing will influence the phenomenon being observed.
What might the opposite effect be ?

David S
September 13, 2013 6:47 pm

And yet the president plans to press on with schemes to thwart climate change:
“Obama Prepares Campaign to Combat Climate Change
President Obama is expected to appeal to Americans about the perils of rising temperatures and the economic benefits of dealing with climate change”
From Scientific American June 24, 2013
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=obama-prepares-campaign-to-combat-climate-change
The problem is that we live in a society similar to that depicted in Orwell’s 1984. Reality no longer matters. The truth is whatever government says it is. Anyone who disagrees could be sent to a re-education camp. The only solution to this is to vote out all the crooks who currently run things and replace them with people who are dedicated to the truth and the Constitution. And there aren’t many around like that.

Crispin in Waterloo
September 13, 2013 7:00 pm

@thingadonta
A Russian lady, after the fall of communism, said that communism was wonderful, if they could just invent people who didn’t need to eat.

Martin 457
September 13, 2013 7:03 pm

Why do I think of Schrodingers cat?
Put them all in a round room and tell them to piss in a corner.

kadaka (KD Knoebel)
September 13, 2013 8:13 pm

I do not see how that could be true. Cats do not squeal like piglets when poked. Nor would the shape seen on the outside look like a piglet, but could pass for a rabbit. As I’ve mentioned to my mother before, once dressed with the feet, head, and tail lopped off, how could you tell the difference when roasted and served for supper?
Is a more-historical sack needed than common cloth, like tight-woven thick burlap, or perhaps canvas? Did people used to try to sell pigs in duffel bags? Makes more sense than wrapped in a blanket, but not much.

September 13, 2013 8:15 pm

It is time for outrage? I’ve been outraged for years. Perhaps it is time for complete disgust and utter disdain.

RACookPE1978
Editor
September 13, 2013 8:44 pm

cartoonmick says:
September 13, 2013 at 5:45 pm
This corrects your blog . . .
This is a fictional true tale and any all relations to persons living today are deliberately relevant and true.
THE FINAL CHAPTER
Dictator Hussein lived across the blue water from St Abbott the fair and noble man, and Dictator Hussein did read from his teleprompter (not being able to speak without it), and said what he was told to read from the prompter and say only what he was told to say, because he was ignorant and knew nothing and could think of nothing original nor knowledgeable. And thus, everything Hussein said “was crap”, and he firmly believed any changes in Earth’s climate were caused by human activity because Hussein was a hate-filled man and hated all that which was good and all that contributed to Man. And Hussein genuflected to the priests in his government-funded ivory towers and gave them more money and promoted their religion because their religion glorified him and promoted his hatred for all that was good for Man.
He was not concerned in our survival on Earth, as his priest and his government was not at risk because Hussein had the control of the press in the rooms and the priests in the ivory towers. Yet Hussein’s people hated Men and said aloud that they wanted all Men to be killed and to leave the face of the earth. To kill Men and to cause harm and to murder children was his desire and was Hussein’s vote and his medicine – And he forced all to kill the children and to kill the old and the poor. And Hussein denied others their charities and their religions, and Hussein denied all others a voice and their freedoms and yet Hussein demanded their money and their time and their loyalty and their children to serve him and his religion.
For Hussein was only interested in his own survival and immediate future at the helm of his powerful realm, for he knew that no one could speak who would criticize him or his beliefs, because he denied all others their religions in public and in private and their doctor’s office.
For him to survive, he must keep his “Powerful Big Business” friends happy by allowing them to continue polluting by paying Hussein’s businesses from the government, at great profit to Hussein’s businesses and at no cost to themselves. Anf thus did the government unions and the government-funded businesses that funded Hussein’s elections were given the government’s money and paid no taxes themselves tot he government, yet while they demanded ever more money from Hussein’s government.
He devised a fiendish plan, a solution for the happiness of his “Powerful Big Business” friends and his unions who funded his elections and his ivory towers who who gave him their writings and his religions its texts and its dogma.
He would pay them to pollute. He would pay them to lie. He would pay them to travel. He would pay them to build and to buy and to write and to read and to teach. But all at a price,: Should they ever not write what Hussein wanted, should they ever say what Hussein wanted to be quiet, should they research what Hussein wanted to confound, should they ever find what Hussein wanted hidden, should they ever think what Hussein wanted filtered and forbidden, they would be cast out and receive no funds and be ostracized and be cursed and be derided and condemned. And Hussein priests in Hussein’s ivory towers did do his binding and condemned those who thought the unthinkable and who wrote the unwriteable and who taught the heresy.
And their continued pollution of Hussein’s priests would pollute the earth’s climate and would destroy the earth sciences, contrary to the opinions of the climate scientists who had not yet been arrested and imprisoned. Yet those not fired and those not ridiculed and those who thinking the unthinkable were condemned and were cursed into silence by Hussein’s priests..
As the years went by, Hussein’s followeres and Hussein’s priests found it harder to breathe and harder to eat, and they no more trips and no more money because they had stopped the people whopaid their taxes and had fired those who tought and and ridiculed those who were right-thinkning and were honest, but Hussein was not worried, as all around him had faced similar problems but were on permanent government security and permanent government salaries to fund whatever Hussein wanted and to live as Hussein wanted to live. Yet the poor died. And the old died. And the starving died. And the thirsty died. And the cold died. And the ones who could pay the electricity died. But Hussein was happy, for Hussein was not starving and Hussein was not poor and Hussein was not thirsty and Hussein was not old. And Hussein’s government paid the electricity and Hussein’s friends played basketball and Hussein entertaied him and Hussein’s friends were rich and were powerful on Hussein’s government contracts and the taxpayer’s money.
The food shortages had not troubled him either, for there was enough CO2 from nature to feed those who had not yet drowned in the 6 inch higher ocean. But none drowned, for none but Hussein’s friends could go to the ocean to play, but none Hussein’s friends could afford the food to feed their family.
And Hussein had paid his “Powerful Big Business” friends to cut down and burn as many trees as they wished to make their palm oil into fuel, and to burn as much corn as they could to make the sugars to make the cars run poorly, regardless of the naysayers and increasing sand storms and increased erosion and starving people who could not eat the burned corn and the palm oil.
His “Powerful Big Business” friends suggested he not alarm himself over the eastern skies which became darker each day, as this was a minimal risk factor and would one day disappear. For Hussein’s friend would always afford their trips and their pleasures. And despite the increasing cold Hussein’s friends burned their corn and burned their palm oil flying to the still warm beaches away from the colder plains and the snow-covered ice fields where the poor lay starving and freezing.
Yet the dark clouds grew, the sun was rarely seen and people died from the cold whilst others starved to death.
Undeterred, Hussein in his racist hatred and his infinite wisdom from the priests and the lairs in the ivory towers, increased the taxes to raise more money to pay for his food and warmth.
But no monies came, there were no people left, no “Powerful Big Business”, for all had perished in the climate change which he was told to say was mankind’s making.
. . . . and as the dark clouds sank slowly in the west, our lonely Hussein was too stupid to realize to finally understand that climate change was not “crap, ”that CO2 was fertilizer and was released for the good of Man, and that true heroes are not told what to say and true heroes are not told what to read from the teleprompter. Yeah, it was Hussein’s plan which was “crap”.