In 2007, the IPCC predicted that rising global temperatures would kill off many species. But in its new report, part of which will be presented next Monday, the UN climate change body backtracks. There is a shortage of evidence, a draft version claims.
…
Global warming is said to be threatening thousands of animal and plant species with extinction. That, at least, is what the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been predicting for years.
But the UN climate body now says it is no longer so certain. The second part of the IPCC’s new assessment report is due to be presented next Monday in Yokohama, Japan. On the one hand, a classified draft of the report notes that a further “increased extinction risk for a substantial number of species during and beyond the 21st century” is to be expected. On the other hand, the IPCC admits that there is no evidence climate change has led to even a single species becoming extinct thus far.
========================================================
Sunshine hours writes of another about-face from the IPCC:
Everytime I argue with members of the AGW Cult they claim we are in the midst of a “great extinction”. I ask them to name 10 species. When they can’t name any, I ask for 5. They usually come up with one animal that has been hunted to extinction (which is horrible, but not AGW)
Old Prediction:
“Global warming is said to be threatening thousands of animal and plant species with extinction. That, at least, is what the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been predicting for years.”
New Confession:
“ IPCC admits that there is no evidence climate change has led to even a single species becoming extinct thus far.”
Polar Bears Are Doing Fine:
“At most, the draft report says, climate change may have played a role in the disappearance of a few amphibians, fresh water fish and mollusks. Yet even the icons of catastrophic global warming, the polar bears, are doing surprisingly well. Their population has remained stable despite the shrinking of the Arctic ice cap.”
Models Suck at predicting extinctions:
“”There is very little confidence that models currently predict extinction risk accurately,” the report notes. Very low extinction rates despite considerable climate variability during past hundreds of thousands of years have led to concern that “forecasts for very high extinction rates due entirely to climate change may be overestimated.””
=============================================================
As Willis has said: Where are the corpses?
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The mega fauna extinction that Tim Flannery has suggested was caused by humans has been denied fervently by science. They were not grazers like the kangaroo, they were browsers, who could eat trees, and like elephants had long gestation periods. A lot of species grew smaller, like your bison. But tell this to the crocodile they have survived well. Or the Bull shark that has now invaded fresh water and Qld’s golf courses? The small pox has been almost eradicated, polio, and of course the bubonic plague that killed millions. Although the reason for this is the grey rat killed the black rat. But bubonic plague still is recorded in America, because it is carried by prairie dogs. If their now hypothesis shows flaws, where does this leave them? Up the creek without a paddle. I think we will soon find out more in years to come.
But does this admission mean that Al and Mann(?) have to return their Nobel prizes for predicting something that has no basis in science?
The woolly Mammoth and Rhino were cold climate mammals, ice age animals. But the same species in Africa still remains despite poaching for their tusks. Certainly humans have been responsible for over hunting some species, and the dingo got rid of some of our marsupials.
And the Tasmania tiger, was hunted by humans and dogs who thought they savaged sheep, but the dingo never made it to Tasmania. Most of the predators in nature have survived.
CaligulaJones says: March 28, 2014 at 12:55 pm
“burning and harvesting (not to mention hunting) the birds”
please make that:
“burning and harvesting (not to mention hunting), the birds”
Just the ol’ copy editor in me…
“burning and harvesting (not to mention hunting) the birds” is correct.
“burning and harvesting, not to mention hunting, the birds” would be even more correcter.
There was a WUWT article about no mammals becoming extinct in recent years, but I can’t find it – anyone??? It might have been by Willis…
With more evidence that polar bears are doing surprisingly well, was Michael Mann being duplicitous?
In December 2010 the Center for Biological Diversity featured Mann in their press release “Climate Scientists, Biologists and Groups Representing Millions of Americans Ask Obama to Follow Science in Determining Polar Bears’ Fate.”
Mann gave this heart breaking report, ““Many climate scientists, like myself, study climate change by poring over large data sets and running climate model simulations. Global warming can at times seem very distant, almost an abstract concept,” said Dr. Michael E. Mann, professor of meteorology at Penn State University. “When I ventured up to Hudson Bay in mid-November and saw the undernourished polar bears with their cubs, sitting around at the shore of the Hudson Bay, waiting for the then month-overdue sea ice to arrive so they could begin hunting for food, it suddenly came home for me. For the first time in my life, I actually saw climate change unfolding before my eyes. It was a sobering moment, and one I’ll never forget.”
27 March: PR Web: MEDIA ADVISORY: International Gathering of Scientists Skeptical of Man-Caused Global Warming to Take Place in Las Vegas from July 7 to July 9
Ninth International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC-9) will feature world-famous scientists and writers, precede FreedomFest 2014.
Is the theory of man-made global warming still credible? Why do surveys show a majority of Americans and scientists do not believe global warming is man-made and a major problem?
Hundreds of the world’s most prominent “skeptics” of the claim that human activity is causing a climate crisis will converge in Las Vegas on July 7–9 to review the latest research and celebrate what they see as recent events that vindicate their opposition to what some claim is a “scientific consensus.”
The Heartland Institute – which The Economist magazine in 2012 called “the world’s most prominent think tank promoting skepticism about man-made climate change” – is joining scores of other think tanks and advocacy groups to host the 9th International Conference on Climate Change at the Mandalay Bay Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas…
“The scientists Heartland works with demanded we host a ninth conference this year to foster a much-needed frank, honest, and open discussion of the current state of climate science,” said Heartland Institute President Joseph Bast, “and we just couldn’t refuse. The public, the press, and the scientific community will all benefit from learning about the latest research and observational data that indicate climate science is anything but ‘settled.’”…
For more information about The Heartland Institute and the 9th International Conference on Climate Change, contact Director of Communications Jim Lakely at jlakely(at)heartland.org or 312/377-4000.
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/03/prweb11708533.htm
Today’s Telegraph reports that the UN fears for the life of bees due to climate change. Considering that bees have been around longer, as a species, than we have this is pure alarmism.
Hangtown Bob says:
March 28, 2014 at 11:31 am
“I strongly disagree with this. I am certain that global warming led to the ultimate extinction of both mastodons and wooly mammoths…..”
Obviously, when the original poster used the term ‘climate change’ he was referring to the modern era. Do you know of any species that went extinct because of climate change / global warming since 1900?
Chris
Hangtown Bob says:
March 28, 2014 at 11:31 am
“I strongly disagree with this. I am certain that global warming led to the ultimate extinction of both mastodons and wooly mammoths…..”
——————-
If I am not mistaken, those poor animals were the victims of a giant rock hitting the earth which indeed caused rapid and massive catastrophic climactic change. But then there were many other species which fell at that time too.. Where was man again and how was he creating CO2?
This is huge. It will provide ammunition against the EPA. CO2 is not pollution, it is fertilizer which will save the 3rd world. Get on board my liberal brothers do not deny the possibilities of CO2.
Reblogged this on gottadobetterthanthis and commented:
With the daily and annual temperature changes most species of everything endure constantly, the assertion of extinction due to purported global warming has always been hyperbolic.
================================================================
Wow! So how does Man (in this case, “The White Man”) get blamed or praised here and for what?
Blamed for decimating the American Indians? (Columbus was an expert at germ warfare.)
Praised for increasing the population of a native bird species?
Praised or blamed for inventing the punt gun?
“burning and harvesting (not to mention hunting) the birds” is correct.
“burning and harvesting, not to mention hunting, the birds” would be even more correcter.
===========================================================
Figure of Interruption. A parenthetical remark may add to what is being communicated, even when commas rather than parenthesis are used) but can be “skipped over” and the basic thought remains intact and grammatically intact.
(And, yes, I did mix them on purpose.)
“grammatically intact.”
Should be:
“grammatically correct.”
(So says a frustrated perfectionist.8-)
Climate-induced “species extinction” is in the same realm of science-free fantasy as “climate refugees”, with the ultimate goal of hooking people emotionally.
macromite (March 28, 2014 at 4:51 pm) “I’ve searched the primary literature and cannot find any records of Whooping Cranes having been killed by wind turbines.”
With just a few hundred birds left, it is unlikely to find such records. But there is a great deal of concern about the potential problem in the literature as there should be.
As it becomes obvious to all that there is no evidence supporting claims of significant anthropogenic warming, one species will quickly be extinguished — the alarmists.
How do you cool an ocean ?
Ant some years ago when there were fears that the Gulf Stream was slowing and being diverted, some joker suggested putting giant fans on the sea floor to keep it circulating. Talk about wind turbines being bird choppers what about fish choppers, LOL.
How does Roger Harrabin square this news with some of the crap he has been spewing about on BBC lately about the coral reefs and the so-called threatened loss of species? Well, he doesn’t, I guess.
Jimbo says:
March 28, 2014 at 12:00 pm
Some excellent stuff there. It is becoming more apparent to me that perhaps the warmists are trying to hasten OUR extinction.
J. Philip Peterson says:
March 28, 2014 at 9:02 pm
Try:
Where Are The Corpses?
AlwaysTrust Your Gut Extinct
New paper from Loehle & Eschenbach shows extinction data has been wrongly blamed on climate change due to island species sensitivity
There are a number more not by me, see here et seq. for a list.
w.
To David in Michigan:
Responding to your: “I thought this was somewhat settled already, in 2011 (another model)…”
Please note that Hubbell, in the report you quote, is saying that the “backward model”
of the species-area relationship is not valid. You may have heard of the ludicrous
prediction made by E.O. Wilson back in the early 1990s that “27,000 species a year
were being destroyed”. Well, Wilson also used that relationship “backward”.
If Hubbell is only finding that such estimates are 160 percent too high, then I’d
humbly suggest that HIS model is also badly overstating the case.