Meh, same old 'gloom and doom' from the IPCC over new climate report

SRAR5[1]Here is a few newsbytes about the IPCC draft synthesis report. From all indications, it’s going to be a real yawner, rehashing all the alarmism we’ve heard again and again for years. Of course, that bastion of balanced leftist reporting, The Guardian, managed to get an advance copy, and of course, from their perspective we are all going to roast. 

MSM CAGW orgy to follow:

1 Nov: UK Telegraph: Emily Gosden: UN climate change report to warn of ‘severe, pervasive’ effects of global warming, flooding, dangerous heatwaves, ill health and violent conflicts among likely risks if the world keeps burning fossil fuels at current rates, IPCC expected to say

The world is on course to experience “severe and pervasive” negative impacts from climate change unless it takes rapid action to slash its greenhouse gas emissions, a major UN report is expected to warn on Sunday.

Flooding, dangerous heatwaves, ill health and violent conflicts are among the likely risks if temperatures exceed 2C above pre-industrial levels, the report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change will say.

Yet on current trends, continued burning of fossil fuels could see temperature increases of between 3.7C and 4.8C by the end of the century, the report warns, according to a draft seen by the Telegraph…

The final document, which has been agreed line-by-line by international government officials at a summit in Copenhagen over the past week, is intended to provide the clearest and most concise summary yet of the widely-agreed scientific evidence on climate change…

***Richard Black, director of the Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit, said the key question for those finalising the IPCC report was “what to say about the elephant in the room… that if the computer model projections are right, keeping global warming below 2C basically means ending fossil fuel use well before today’s children start drawing their pensions”…

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/11202987/UN-climate-change-report-to-warn-of-severe-pervasive-effects-of-global-warming.html


 

Lean says it’s worse than the IPCC report suggests!

31 Oct: UK Telegraph: Geoffrey Lean: Danger: irreversible climate-change forces at work

The new report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says that irreversible consequences could be averted, at surprisingly little cost, if action is taken without delay

Campaigners against global warming and their bitterest opponents are united by one word this weekend: irreversible.

It appears 48 times in the draft of the most important report so far on climate change, being finalised today in Copenhagen, signifying that unless the world takes speedy action to curb emissions of greenhouse gases their dire effect will last for thousands of years, at least…

Yet – even before publication, it is badly out of date – because it results from a cumbersome six-year process, which cannot take recent scientific findings into account. One of the most worrying studies to date, suggesting that the Western Antarctic ice sheet may have begun irreversible collapse – eventually raising sea levels worldwide by some 10 feet – was only published last May, far too late to be considered…

The panel urgently needs to get up to speed, issuing regular, perhaps annual, updates on the science…

Facekinis and fashion masks for China’s ‘airpocalypse’

Stand by for the latest in haute couture – the pollution mask. Designer Yin Peng has just paraded them as part of his spring/summer 2015 collection during China Fashion Week in Beijing.

It’s dressing for the “airpocalypse”, as the Chinese call the ever-more-frequent days when tiny particulates exceed maximum World Health Organisation standards by some twentyfold…

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/11201482/Danger-irreversible-climate-change-forces-at-work.html


 

31 Oct: Guardian: Adam Vaughan: IPCC report: six graphs that show how we’re changing the world’s climate

A draft of the synthesis report, seen by the Guardian, shows it will repeat the message that there’s no doubt over our role in global warming: “Human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history,” it says.

It doesn’t mince words on the repercussions: “The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, and sea level has risen.”…

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/31/ipcc-report-six-graphs-that-show-how-were-changing-the-worlds-climate


 

31 Oct: Bloomberg: Eric Roston: Enough With the Fat Climate Change Reports Already

The United Nations in 1988 entrusted the future of civilization to a loosely confederated, all-volunteer band of Earth scientists and economists. This coterie has a long, bureaucratic name with no memorable abbreviation. It was charged with taking the temperature, so to speak, of the whole planet and advising governments on how big a problem they had their hands. Turns out, a big problem.

Early next week the group drops the last of four massive tomes that together make up its fifth report in a quarter century. In essence, next week’s edition is a synthesis of the thousands of pages of synthesis that started coming out last fall.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s scientific reviews land every six years or so, like the anvil that falls on Wile E. Coyote’s head from time to time…

The question is, do we really need these massive reports, with little new transformative information, that very few people read?…

Here are three ways modern technology could help the IPCC get you to pay attention.

  • Turn on, Log in, Drop by…
  • Front of Mind and Urgent. Every Six Years…
  • Hire Web Developers…

There’s now a cottage industry of websites that explain the main aspects of climate change, from governments (NASA or NOAA), nonprofits (Climate Central) and individuals (Skeptical Science). Researchers at Yale, Columbia, George Mason and elsewhere have learned a lot about effective and ineffective ways to inform people that the world is heating up. It’s easier than ever to find scientific speech translated into human speech.

And that’s great, because as it turns out, the way scientists conduct their research has very little to do with the way people form opinions about it.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-10-30/enough-with-the-fat-climate-change-reports-already.html

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

176 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
holts7
November 2, 2014 3:30 pm

For goodness sake, are the people that do and support the IPCC for real!
The boy(IPCC & Co) have cried wolf so very much, most folk surely will just
ignore it all, get on with life and do something productive for society instead
of wasting huge monies on an almost non-problem!

tolip ydob (There is no such thing as a perfectly good airplane)
November 2, 2014 4:28 pm

“Flooding, dangerous heatwaves, ill health and violent conflicts”
All predate fossil fuel usage.
This would also be a future risk if we were herbivores consuming zero fuel.

willhaas
November 2, 2014 8:20 pm

The reality is that there is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate. There is no such evidence in the paleoclimate record. The primary greenhouse gas in the earth’s atmosphere is H2O and it provides ample negative feedbacks to charges in other greenhouse gases so as to mitigate any effect they might have on climate. The climate change we are experiencing today has happened before. The IPCC’s plethora of models based on the idea that an increase in CO2 causes warming have all failed to predict today’s global temperatures. They have predicted global warming that has not occurred. They are wrong. Models have been generated that are based on the idea that climate change is caused by the sun and the oceans that have corrected predicted today’s global temperatures. These models do not include any CO2 effects. The IPCC’s political statements are in deference to the science. There are many good reasons to be conserving on the use of fossil fuels but climate change is not one of them.

November 2, 2014 9:36 pm

Here is a bit of good cheer amidst the doom and gloom from the IPCC. I saw this in a Seattle news site…http://mynorthwest.com/17/2636797/Brisbane-airport-bans-climate-ad-ahead-of-G20
Three cheers for Abbott and his administration.

Larry in Texas
November 2, 2014 11:02 pm

More of the same error, fact-distorting, and false hysteria. The IPCC must be done away with. I will vote for any American presidential candidate who says they will end American funding to the IPCC, and who will actually follow up without being intimidated by the Warmist ideologues.

Richard Keen
November 2, 2014 11:21 pm

“The final document, which has been agreed line-by-line by international government officials”
Need I know more?
The IPCC is a bunch on sciency-looking charts and color maps approved by government officials, and is no more science than is Mein Kampf, Das Kapital, or Dreams of my Father. Or the 1000 pages of the Affordable Health Care Act, for that matter.

November 3, 2014 2:51 am

This morning CNN International had a short bit about the IPCC report, followed by a young man discussing super hurricanes in the Pacific. During his discussion he mentioned the number of “superhurricanes” had doubled (he didn´t describe a superhurricane as such). He also mentioned the increase was attributable to higher Pacific Ocean temperatures, and waved his hands over a sector around and just south of the equator and about 160 to 170 degrees East longitude. As he waved his hands he claimed the surface temperature in the Pacific (presumably in this sector) had reached “31 to 32 degrees C”.
This led me to look at the NOAA/NESDIS map published in October 2014, and the current Argo buoy data (I get it updated every morning from the Argo system). Interestingly I am seeing a mismatch between the NOAA color palette temperature and the Argo buoys. This repeats my previous experience with NOAA temperature maps in the Indian Ocean (something I pointed out a few days ago).
If somebody could explain whether I´m making a mistake comparing the NOAA sea surface temperature presentations with the Argo buoy data I would appreciate it.
But neither the (distorted) NOAA maps nor the Argo buoy data showed sea surface temperature “between 31 and 32 degrees” as claimed by the CNN International report. Based on what I can see they seem to be putting up a short bit about the IPCC report, then they pile on with misleading information. I saw a similar approach at the BBC, but I couldn´t identify an outright lie. I guess I´ll try to see if my other European channels are following the same pattern…
[Thank you. .mod]

E.M.Smith
Editor
Reply to  Fernando Leanme
November 3, 2014 9:46 am

CNN is no longer available on my cable feed (of the DISH sat. service). Now I’m kind of getting a clue about why…
Oh, and how do I get a few copies of that IPCC report? It looks very large, and solid. As this winter is being record cold in Florida, I could use a few free copies for the stove…

kenin
November 4, 2014 1:49 pm

if I had to sum up this b.s report into two words, it would be:
We believe.
That’s how we should be interpreting this garbage. Its their opinion, that’s all. Its carefully written in a way that screams- WE BELIEVE!.
notice how many times they used “likely” in the freakin report.