Discussion thread for IPCC live press conference webcast

Webcast of IPCC press conference

STOCKHOLM, 24 September – The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is holding a press conference at 10.00 a.m. Stockholm time (4AM EDT, 1AM PDT) on Friday 27 September 2013 to present the Summary for Policymakers of the Working Group I contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report(AR5).

This press conference will be webcast in English and Chinese and can be followed live.

This link will be live around that time:

http://www.ipcc.ch/webcast

=============================================================

Depending on the timing of the release of the SPM in the webcast, I may or may not be awake to watch it, so, I’m relying on readers to post links tot he SPM and to dissect what was announced.

In the discussion thread, feel free to point out issues in the SPM and changes from the draft SPM here: Access: The “leaked” IPCC AR5 draft Summary for Policymakers

Look to see what they’ve done about pinning down a best guess for climate sensitivity. – Anthony

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
transport by zeppelin

News Flash *****
I’ve found the missing heat!
It’s hiding in my Kelvinator

dp

So they’re going to start lying right away and look like idiots and it is our job to make sure nobody misses that. These meetings are nothing if not a gift to the skeptically normal. We owe it to the world to give the reality deniers a large audience. They’re feeling the pain because theirs is the stupid that burns.

Under the sub-topic of Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves I wrote a wrapper for Donna Laframboise’s blog article on the process.

noaaprogrammer

Current temperature in Stockholm is 41 degrees F, with the low expected to be 39. So not too much warming is going on there. –Just checking for something similar to the Gore effect!

The morning MSM in Australia is trying its hardest to push the “Its really real” line with talk of 500 year old muscles, tree rings and warming oceans but no mention of any sceptic or any real data. They showed a stevenson box in perfect condition beside an automated unit without mentioning that the former “very accurate weather measurements” were not actually being used by the IPCC.

wayne

Bernd Felsche, read your links. Sounds more like they will beat them until the consensus a solid 100%. And sadly, that is exactly what is happening… 100% agreement is manditory, to refuse to agree is futile and to hell with the science.

Greg

This press conference will be webcast in English and Chinese and can be followed live.
These guys just don’t know when they’re beat , do they?
China pulled the run on their scam in Copenhagen and they think they’re going have the wool pulled now? Get real.

IISD is the quasi-official rapporteur of all conclaves environmental. Here’s their latest tweet:

Discussions continued through the night, final editing work now on SPM #IPCC #AR5 http://t.co/IzkBRetS56— IISDRS (@IISDRS) September 27, 2013

Nothing quite like pulling two consecutive all-nighters to ensure that one’s “product” has been carefully and thoroughly considered and constructed, eh?!

Andy

Our bbc are already pushing it with simpering harrabin. It pitiful.
I especially liked his bit where he said mistakes were made e.g. glaciers melting but they are 95 percent certain man is causing the warming that’s causing glaciers to melt etc.

KNR

Headline
Turkeys did not vote for Christmas , its ‘worse then we thought ‘
They really have no choice but to talk it up with lots of ‘could ‘ ,’should ‘ , ‘may ‘ etc and nice ‘useful ‘ distant deadlines . Its really not about the ‘science ‘

J Martin

Apparently the IPCC are blaming the change in the AMO on global warming and co2 !!

For the first time, the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is due to give a clear prediction of how global warming will affect currents in the Atlantic Ocean.
It will say that the circulation of warm and cold water in the Atlantic, which includes the Gulf Stream, will weaken by 20 to 44 per cent by the end of the century.
The report will say that the warming of the oceans will interfere with the currents in the Atlantic, also known as the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC). It will state: “It is very likely that the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation will weaken over the 21st century. It is likely that there will be some decline in the AMOC by 2050, but there will be some decades when the AMOC increases.”

Re the IPCC blaming forthcoming cooling on co2. It’s quite a clever move. The reality must be that given that the next solar cycle may well go missing with some cooling an inevitable result, added to the PDO having gone negative and the AMO about to, some cooling, especially in the UK must be the most likely future for perhaps tens of years.
If the IPCC had completely ignored the likelihood of cooling and cooling then arrived, they would completely lose all credibility in every sector of society. Will they get away with blaming mankind’s output of co2 for the natural cycles of the oceans. ?
Leopards don’t change their spots.
This insanity from;
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/10337064/IPCC-report-Britain-could-cool-if-Gulf-Stream-slows.html

Kev-in-Uk

I’m not sure there are many folk (on the skeptic side) that could listen/watch such a presentation for more than a few minutes at a time without feeling physically sick – so this really needs to be a crowd sourced task to try and cover it all! (Maybe Anthony should have issued a health warning with his request?)

Sigmundb

In todays newspapers here in Europe all groups are positioning for the release.
Green groups sound the alarm, main stream scientists with grave faces explains the dire situation (worse then ever, pause is an illusion, ice melting all over the place, this years arctic ice comback is nothing).
Important difference to last thime though, sceptical/lukewarmer voices get some cover and main stream media is asking critical questions about ice and the hiatus/pause and the climate sensivity to C02.
There is a critical presense this time and there will be hard questions about the IPCCs increased confidence in AGW related to issues like the unforecast hiatus, downadjusted sensitivity, retreat on bad weather etc.
Given how important it is for the IPCC and their cohorts to keep the momentum it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

StephenP

If anyone gets time to see Professor Brian Cox’s latest programme ‘Science Britannica’ on BBC iPlayer, Episode 2, do so. He “reveals what science really is, explores the mindset of those who practise it, and shows how science runs through the past, present and future of everyone.”
He interviews the Editor of Nature with a series of leading questions as to how the peer review process ensures that any article published is settled science because it has been through a ‘rigorous’ peer review process. As a result we should believe everything published therein. Especially as regards global warming.

Steve

News in the UK pushing the line that the IPCC is 90% sure man is to blame for warming then follows up with the ‘signed by 900 experts’.
Didn’t everyone agree how fine the Emperor’s new clothes were?
Thank you to all those that contribute here – I’ve found a place of calm against the madness.

LabMunkey

In the UK the BBC are covering the pause, but brought on a climate blogger as an expert witness to show that the pause was caused by volcanic aerosols around the equator, or pollution particulates.
Luckily the governmental minister then chipped in to say that the issue is climate disruptions (more heat waves, more hurricanes etc……) to support the stance……
it was interesting- you could tell the BBC was trying to square the perceived impartiality vs their ideological bias box they find themselves in….
nothing to see here…. move along please…..

Keitho

The BBC are in full cry this morning and the cry is “we are all going to die”. Roger Harrabin keeps on popping up with a newly leaked opening statement and reads excerpts from it. Each new release he quotes is more alarming than ever.He also claims there isn’t one, not one they can find, scientist working in the climate field who doesn’t believe we are all going to get baked because mankind are just uncaring bastards.
They go one further on the Beeb and declare that because of AGW the UK will get colder by at least one degree because the CO2 will cause the Atlantic currents to change. Sceptics are just bully boys and the science is strong and settled but the politicians are weak and unwilling to destroy their economies to save the world.
I think this one will run and run.

Peter Plail

StephenP – I watched the programme with Cox and was greatly impressed with the arguments he presented for the way scientists approach scientific enquiry. I particularly liked the way he described the “double blind” multi-billion pound CERN hunt for the Higgs boson where they devised this experiment to verify their conjecture. Sadly the section on global warming seemed like an insert from another programme where all the good stuff he mentioned elsewhere went out the window; just talk of consensus with the editor (?) of Nature saying that it must be true because they don.t get any papers for publication that “disprove” global warming.
It is astounding that a man with the brain power of Cox cannot see the contradictions in his own TV program – where is the elegant experiment that will prove beyond reasonable doubt the “reality” of global warming?

steverichards1984

BBC this morning, the UK Chief Scientist Advisor, Sir Mark Walport FRS FMedSci, commented on the rash of record breaking floods, heatwaves and other natural phenomena, to ‘prove’ that global warming is happening and that we are to blame!
Is there any hope for rational discussion and real science when someone like this goes into fairy tale science?

Flavius

Why isn’t their site working, I guess Swiss technology is not so reliable lol

oakwood

Ban ki Moon’s intro: “The heat is on. Now we must act”.

oakwood

Sec-Gen of WMO: we are seeing more impacts on weather patterns, and have seen many extremes over past decades. – So a big change from IPCC’s SREX report just over a year ago.

janama

does this man realise this is being recorded and will be played back in 10 years time.

Peter Miller

I am watching the IPCC farce right now, North Korea would be proud of this type of stitch up.
Interestingly, there is absolutely no applause for any of the speakers.
All I can hear is that the industry needs more money for the ‘science’, this is an “essential investment” and “it proves the need for the IPCC”. Natural climate cycles remain a heresy. Apparently global warming is not an ideology.
This is little more than a jamboree for quasi-government bureaucrats.

janama

you’d think that for an important announcement such as this they could get the audio together.

Dermot O'Logical

Never have I been so depressed about the state, and status, of science #consenseless

Good morning. To honor the release of the IPCC’s AR5 SPM today, I’ve just posted a YouTube video that discusses the curious way that climate modelers appear to have compensated for a failing in the models, which has, in turn, caused an even greater failure. It’s attached to the following blog post:
http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2013/09/27/video-climate-models-used-by-the-ipcc-for-ar5-are/
This thread deserves top billing here at WUWT for a number of hours, so I’ll cross post it (my new post with the video) here at WUWT in a few hours.
Regards from my chilly corner of the world.

M Courtney

According to the Guardian at 9.30am BST, Pachauri has just said,

I also want to highlight that each of the last three decades has successively warmed at the earth’s surface

Which is surprising if true.
He has rejected the deep ocean for the missing heat and says it’s at the surface (but sneaking post the thermometers this decade).

A lesson from criminal justice research: confidence levels are a poor indicator of accuracy http://tinyurl.com/kohyc86
The IPCC’s change from 90 to 95% certainty is entirely subjective. It merely tells us how IPCC personnel FEEL. Ho hum.

Kurt in Switzerland

Thomas Stocker says that Climate Change is the greatest challenge facing mankind today.
This is true because they decided this in Cancun some years ago.
‘Nuff said.
Kurt in Switzerland

The approved Summary for Policymakers, dated 27Sept2013, is online. No cover art yet and it’s still in draft form:
http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/uploads/WGIAR5-SPM_Approved27Sep2013.pdf

Keith Minto

Stocker :
” 1983-2012, warmest in 1400 years”, sure by-passes the MWP.

If this is how they addressed the hiatus in full, they will be laughed at across the globe:
“In addition to robust multi-decadal warming, global mean surface temperature exhibits substantial decadal and interannual variability (see Figure SPM.1). Due to natural variability, trends based on short records are very sensitive to the beginning and end dates and do not in general reflect long-term climate trends. As one example, the rate of warming over the past 15 years (1998–2012; 0.05 [–0.05 to +0.15] °C per decade), which begins with a strong El Niño, is smaller than the rate calculated since 1951 (1951–2012; 0.12 [0.08 to 0.14] °C per decade)”

Keith Minto

Stocker: “93% of warming is in the oceans, this has saved us from more heating”.
“Warming will continue under all scenarios available”

R. de Haan

They now continue the push the hoax with force.
This is fantasy la la land.
We are confronted with a NAZI like doctrine on a global scale.
The presenters of the report are confident of 100% political support, otherwise their claims wouldn’t be so outrageous.
I think the we’re back to 2008 and we seriously have to think about other ways to stop this nonsense although I think Mother Nature will proof to be the best ambassador of the skeptic case.
We’re going to need WUWT for a long time to come.
In the mean time we have good news from New York:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/27/nyregion/new-yorks-air-is-cleanest-in-50-years-survey-finds.html?_r=0

Eliza

Trouble is most will listen to them not here and this I am afraid will continue for much more years than I or you think. Much stronger action (financial-legal) is need to disband the fraudsters.

Later on page 12, they write with respect to the hiatus:
“The observed reduction in surface warming trend over the period 1998–2012 as compared to the period 1951–2012, is due in roughly equal measure to a reduced trend in radiative forcing and a cooling contribution from internal variability, which includes a possible redistribution of heat within the ocean (medium confidence). The reduced trend in radiative forcing is primarily due to volcanic eruptions and the timing of the downward phase of the 11-year solar cycle. However, there is low confidence in quantifying the role of changes in radiative forcing in causing the reduced warming trend. There is medium confidence that internal decadal variability causes to a substantial degree the difference between observations and the simulations; the latter are not expected to reproduce the timing of internal variability. There may also be a contribution from forcing inadequacies and, in some models, an overestimate of the response to increasing greenhouse gas and other anthropogenic forcing (dominated by the effects of aerosols). {9.4, Box 9.2, 10.3, Box 10.2, 11.3}”
Sorry, that is not going to cut it.

Kurt in Switzerland

Min. 1.5ºC warming is inevitable under ALL scenarios – a panel of clairvoyants decided as much.
Kurt in Switzerland

Keith Minto

I can’t resolve x and y axies on my screen.
Questions invited from media.

rogerknights
Eliza

Question times very favorauble to skeptics so far you must save this video the hiatus stocker being forced to admit there being hamnered

Keith Minto

Pachurari : “an excellent document”…but did not answer a question of doubt in findings. 9,200 papers reviewed.
“Climate relevant trends should be over 30yrs” Stocker.
.

This is rich:
“Greenhouse gases contributed a global mean surface warming likely to be in the range of 0.5°C to 1.3°C over the period 1951−2010, with the contributions from other anthropogenic forcings, including the cooling effect of aerosols, likely to be in the range of −0.6°C to 0.1°C. The contribution from natural forcings is likely to be in the range of −0.1°C to 0.1°C, and from internal variability is likely to be in the range of −0.1°C to 0.1°C. Together these assessed contributions are consistent with the observed warming of approximately 0.6°C to 0.7°C over this period. {10.3}”
In other words, they’re saying all of the warming is manmade. How comical!

amoorhouse

Just flicking through the news 24 channels on my box here:
BBC – carrying the IPCC conference live
Sky – Big Brother
France24 – architecture
CNN – Bank shares
NHK – Watches
CCTV – QinPing landslide
CNBC – Shares
Bloomberg – business confidence in Nike
RT – Syria resolution
euronews – Syria
Al Jazeera – US/Iran talks
Nobody is listening

Kurt in Switzerland

A reporter for AFP asked the first (and most burning question) of Pachauri:
Does this restore credibility to the IPCC (which has apparently suffered, at least in the eyes of skeptics)?
Pachauri merely underlined the need to restrict human GHG emissions if we are to have hope of stabilizing the climate; he also claimed that the IPCC was scientific and wasn’t concerned with the question of how the general public perceived the summary, before deferring to Stocker. Stocker paid lip service to the hiatus, but claimed that insufficient data was available to say why the warming stopped; he also said insufficient data was available to say what was taking place in the deep oceans.
Kurt in Switzerland

High Treason

Wake up world. The 95% certainty is a number plucked out out of thin air. Here we see the CO2 curve and the actual temperatures diverging-so much for a correlation. I wonder what a real statistician would say about the divergence implying a greater certainty. All shows the IPCC and its parent body, the UN are engaging in nefarious activity.

coldlynx

There is one simple way to get all IPCC climate scientist to dump the message of 95% consensus:
Demand that funding is removed from question about if CO2 is responible to research about how to solve “the problem” to get unlimited inexpensive energy to mankind. Take funding from CAGW to real science.
I bet the message from IPCC will be that CAGW is not settled and need more funding to understand the uncertainties. A new consenus among climate researcher that the uncertainties is larger than IPCC claim will evolve very fast
Fight fire with fire.
It is all about the money.

Keith Minto

Stocker : “Higher scenarios being used,but it depends upon us and our choice with emissions”
” Don’t focus on temperature…?? huge responsibility for our children in 2100 etc etc etc”
No numbers in press release. They seem to think 500Gt emitted, must stop another 500Gt.

Even the Guardian has admitted much lower media turnout than for the last report. (Fiona did not give a confidence level for that assessment. )

wayne

“…. natural forcings [to change temperature] is likely to be in the range of −0.1°C to 0.1°C”
Clearly they are not speaking of the planet Earth. Now which one are they speaking of again?