Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Naked political scaremongering and manipulation? IPCC Author Jim Kossin, who works for The Climate Service, a consultancy firm which helps corporations navigate Biden’s push for climate risk disclosure, has made no secret he hopes the IPCC’s latest climate report will change the outcome of future elections.
‘Get scared’: World’s scientists say disastrous climate change is here
A new report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is the latest — and starkest — warning yet of disasters around the globe.
By ZACK COLMAN and KARL MATHIESEN
08/09/2021 04:01 AM EDT
Updated: 08/09/2021 03:29 PM EDTThe long-feared era of disastrous climate change has arrived.
For the first time, the planet’s top scientists said in a monumental report released on Monday they have definitively linked greenhouse gas emissions to the type of disasters driven by a warmer climate that have touched every corner of the globe this year: extreme rainfall in Germany and China, brutal droughts in the western U.S., a record cyclone in the Philippines and compound events like the wildfires and heat waves from the Pacific Northwest to Siberia to Greece and Turkey.
This is the world as it exists today, with an atmosphere 1.1 degrees Celsius hotter than it was in the pre-industrial era thanks largely to burning fossil fuels such as coal, oil and natural gas. Even grimmer: There is no scenario in the new analysis by the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in which the world avoids breaching the threshold of 1.5 degrees Celsius that the U.S., EU and several other countries have set as a target. Even the weaker 2-degree target that major polluters China and India have set as guideposts will be eclipsed unless greenhouse gas emissions peak by mid-century.
…
“The IPCC report underscores the overwhelming urgency of this moment,” and the upcoming UN climate summit in Glasgow needs to be a turning point, U.S. climate envoy John Kerry said in a statement Monday. “The world must come together before the ability to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius is out of reach. As the IPCC makes plain, the impacts of the climate crisis, from extreme heat to wildfires to intense rainfall and flooding, will only continue to intensify unless we choose another course for ourselves and generations to come.”
…
And the message from those scientists about those disasters is stark: Get used to them. The research shows nations must start playing defense to withstand the weather disasters that will only grow worse unless emissions from fossil fuels are eliminated.
“I think people are more and more starting to get scared,” said Jim Kossin, senior scientist with climate risk firm The Climate Service who was among the IPCC authors for the chapter on extremes. “I think that’ll help to change people’s attitudes. And hopefully that’ll affect the way they vote.”
…
Read more: https://www.politico.com/news/2021/08/09/climate-change-scientists-report-disastrous-502799
My question – what disaster do activists believe has arrived?
A heatwave and a few fires? Even if climate change is contributing to heat waves, would you pay double or triple your current air conditioning electricity bill, because some corrupt politician or bureaucrat in Greece looted the forest management budget?
Think I’m exaggerating about higher bills? Check out how California and other green state electricity rates compare – and California have barely begun their green energy revolution.
As for fires, we know what causes wildfires in California, just like Greece and Australia – and it certainly isn’t climate change.
The argument that fires are inevitable because of climate change is absurd. Remove the fuel and you have no fire. Manage the fuel and you have manageable fires. Let forests grow wild, suppress small natural fires, and tolerate PG&E’s allegedly negligent maintenance of fire prone power lines, as they do in California, and you have fuel buildup and the makings of a forest fire catastrophe.
All totally preventable with an ounce of common sense.
“The End Is Near” is not really the campaign slogan they think it is.
Yes, it definitely will change the trajectory of future elections and if the response is handled correctly in the direction of normalcy not scare mongering. All the b.s. scare tactics might just benefit if we get good reasoned analysis of the AR6 scare mongering by such as Koonin, Lomborg, McIntyre & McKitrick, etc. to cut the legs off of this.
I’m starting to think that AR6 is a good thing. Not only have the left themselves nowhere to go, but they have cut off their own retreat. How do you ramp up “code red” for the next report without making yourself look ridiculous? “Double-Plus-Ungood Code Red”?
The End Is Neigh. There will be no AR7, also a good thing.
When it burns out of control destroys houses kills people and livestock hold them responsible through the courts you have photos and statements
From the article: “The long-feared era of disastrous climate change has arrived.
For the first time, the planet’s top scientists said in a monumental report released on Monday they have definitively linked greenhouse gas emissions to the type of disasters driven by a warmer climate that have touched every corner of the globe this year: extreme rainfall in Germany and China, brutal droughts in the western U.S., a record cyclone in the Philippines and compound events like the wildfires and heat waves from the Pacific Northwest to Siberia to Greece and Turkey.”
What’s the IPCC CONfidence Level for claiming any of these weather events are driven by human activity?
What’s the IPCC CONfidence Level for claiming any of these weather events are driven by human activity?
They have an extremely high confidence level that their assertions will be accepted as published without question. It’s like the media stories about Trump. Regardless of the fact that few were even partially true, they were all believed.
IIRC it was 50%. So it’s a toss-up.
I was being sarcastic, Zig. Note the “CON”. I was implying that the confidence level is a CON job.
And yet the usual suspects will whine and complain about how we skeptics insist on politicizing climate science.
The oil will last long enough for the alarmists to waste $Trillions of our tax dollars on trying to find a substitute.
One trick pony returns to it’s vomit.
So it is 😀
I hate to be so pedantic, but horses can’t vomit…
“As a dog returns to its vomit, so a fool repeats his foolishness.”
Proverbs 26 vs 11.
Unsurprisingly neither author Zack Colman nor Karl Mathiesen has any scientific credentials.
has made no secret he hopes the IPCC’s latest climate report will change the outcome of future elections. 😀 😀 😀
No vote for Biden and complices, seems to be clear 😀 😀
If the voters have any brains…and the “actual” votes, not “harvested” votes, actually determine the outcome.
Climate Science scenario for planet warming is that warming is started by CO2 increase. Warming causes water vapor (WV, a greenhouse gas) to increase adding to the warming. Calculated WV increase trend from just planet warming (HadCRUT4 temperatures) ≈1.04% per decade. As used by Climate Science this contributes to their epic fail in climate prediction.
NASA/RSS has been measuring average global WV by satellite since Jan 1988. The data show an increasing trend of 1.49% per decade which is about 43% faster than possible from just temperature increase. This demonstrates that there must be an additional source of WV.
The comparison is shown here graphically with links to methodology and data sources. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ntl57AEsPYfTppC0DUziRBnq0NV42g5B/view?usp=sharing
This ‘extra’ WV increase can account for all of the temperature increase attributable to humanity (about 0.6 K 1909-2019). Carbon dioxide, in spite of being a ghg, has no significant net effect on climate.
MODERATOR – The exact same comment with the exact same link thread after thread. This troll is polluting your blog.
What happens in USA != GLOBAL. Oil, coal & gas have increased their usage around the WORLD but not the same pattern in USA. Last 18months have seen a reduction in fossil fuel usage (COVID19 effects, less production, less travel). To 2019 global usage of all fossil fuels had not peaked and it would be hard to say for certain if any had now peaked.
https://ourworldindata.org/fossil-fuels
If Australia stopped all CO2 emissions & imported/exported nothing .. it would take 1yr for the rest of the world to increase their emissions. It’s like any AGW effects would still occur but gives us 1 extra year to get to the same point. On the scale of taking 100 to 200 years to see an effect, a difference between 1 year & the next is not significant.
The model runs produce a range of predictions that cover increase & decrease of cloud & rainfall. Not just global average but also when you pick a region these models produce an each-way bet they can’t loose. It’s like making a bet on every horse in the Melbourne cup so you can brag to your mates about picking the winner. Hence why the term “climate change” was important.
There is no single model which is good at predicting climate conditions per year for all regions & years. Averaging hides the fact that these models are inaccurate & unreliable for anything but long term temperature trends (with wide error bands, temperature trend is an input). With enough predictions you can regress to the mean. With enough models & predictions you can later point to 1 of them as the winner & claim success. There are several non-CO2 variables that vary per year which they can adjust as a time series to improve the replication of historical observations. Some of these variables & the other parameters don’t have empirical evidence for the values chosen & why they vary so much between models/runs/years.
The first 5 AR1 reported a lack of confidence in the models predicting cloud, rain or any extreme climate events. The range of model output has not improved so I don’t see how the predictions have suddenly become more reliable. Put push the dire predictions out by another 20 to 50years buys a bit more time for bluffing & additional funding (started pre2000 now we have another 10years as our 3rd or more ‘last chance’).
I don’t have any numbers but, I’d bet that at this date, having survived serial 15 years to doomsday scenarios, that for every one person buying into today’s CAGWing fear mongering, ten people are waking up to the fraud.
That’s a big turn-out.
About 11.3 terrified climate-obsessives in Gippsland?
#village_idiots_for_ghia
The IPCC’s latest (6th) Report has been released. Its “models” once again proclaim that Earth’s temperature is going to rise to unbearable levels unless CO2 levels are drastically reduced. That’s bunkum.
Few have noticed IPCC’s “models” are simply extrapolations of the correlation:
[Earth’s average Temperature vs CO2 levels]
and so assumes that CO2 is the cause … a priori! They offer NO experimental data to support their guess that increasing CO2 causes Earth’s atmospheric temperature to rise. Yet they have the nerve to claim “The science says …!”
The best the IPCC offers is to reckon that CO2 is a “Greenhouse Gas” because it absorbs infrared radiation (IR) – for example that emanating from Earth – whereas the major gases representing 99% of dry air – nitrogen, oxygen and argon do not.
Further, they and others now re-define a Greenhouse Gas as being one that absorbs IR, whereas originally and correctly it was one that absorbs (Earth’s) heat to warm its surface more than it would be without an atmosphere.
What they fail to disclose is that, while not all gases absorb IR, ALL gases absorb HEAT – simply put a clear plastic bag containing whatever gas into the Sun, then feel it getting warmer. As ALL gases are Greenhouse Gases, the atmosphere’s major gases are by far its biggest heat absorbers ie major greenhouse gases, and largely in proportion to their amount, and CO2 input to global temperatures is negligible.
So, yet again a leftard publicly proclaims it is all politically driven shyte. Yawn.
Why are these sadly deluded demonstrators not arrested and removed?
Those protesters wouldn’t want to show their faces around town for a long long time