Essay by Eric Worrall
“I would like to see a situation where scientists make recommendations and then you track them. You ask governments to sign off on what they will do and then you evaluate how much progress they have made.”
We need power to prescribe climate policy, IPCC scientists say
Exclusive: Five IPCC report authors say scientists should be allowed to make policy prescriptions and potentially oversee implementation
Arthur Neslen
Fri 8 Dec 2023 00.00 AEDTSenior climate experts are calling for an overhaul of the structure and powers of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in despair at the slow pace of climate action.
Five lead authors of IPCC reports told the Guardian that scientists should be given the right to make policy prescriptions and, potentially, to oversee their implementation by the 195 states signed up to the UN framework convention on climate change (UNFCCC).
…
Yamina Saheb, the lead author of a chapter in AR6, said: “I would like to see a situation where scientists make recommendations and then you track them. You ask governments to sign off on what they will do and then you evaluate how much progress they have made.”
…
“I think this Cop will demonstrate the impossibility of viable climate diplomacy while the fossil fuel industry runs so many governments and infiltrates negotiating teams,” Steinberger said.
…
Not all IPCC scientists agree. Joyashree Roy, a coordinating lead author on AR6, argued that the IPCC was already becoming more independent and that transforming it into an oversight group would lead to “fragmented decisions [that] cannot solve this unique problem for humanity”.
…
Read more: https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/2023/dec/07/we-need-power-to-prescribe-climate-policy-ipcc-scientists-say
What can I say? Thanks for offering to take away my freedom, but I have a recommendation for where you can shove your idea.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Belief in climate models is like belief in fantasies, neither agree with reality.
The problem is that scientists, as a group, do not have a good prediction track record.
It’s not just about the funding for them. It is also about control, power, and fear.
“One must always keep the tools of statecraft sharp and ready. Power and fear—sharp and ready.”
-Baron Vladimir Harkonnen (Dune)
It turns out all the “tipping points” are psychological/ social/ political – sort of psychotic break on a mass scale. We need a very large padded cell.
They want to be climate scientists, I have a question for each of them:
Sonia Seneviratne, did IPCC scientists sub-press a peer-reviewed published article using political power they gained from the IPCC process rather than scientific arguments?
(In context to climate scientists successfully censoring a peer reviewed and published article by Alimonti et al. earlier this year, circumventing the scientific process like it was done by the catholic church in the middle age, the names of these people are:
Greg Holland, Lisa Alexander, Steve Sherwood, Michael Mann, Richard Betts, Friederike Otto, Stefan Rahmstorf and Peter Cox
https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/think-of-the-implications-of-publishing )
Gert-Jan Nabuurs, are the IPCC reports scientifically honest and integer?
(In context with the amazing speech by R. Feynman´s about cargo cult science and it´s one paragraph:
“””[..] a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty—a kind of leaning over backwards. For example, if you’re doing an experiment, you should report everything that you think might make it invalid—not only what you think is right about it: other causes that could possibly explain your results; and things you thought of that you’ve eliminated by some other experiment, and how they worked—to make sure the other fellow can tell they have been eliminated.[..] “”” https://calteches.library.caltech.edu/51/2/CargoCult.htm )
Julia Steinberger, is the number of global natural disasters increasing?(In context to Alimonti and Mariani´s finding “These observations are supported by piecewise regression analyses that identify three breakpoints (1922, 1975, 2002), with the most recent subperiod 2002–2022 characterized by a significant decline in number of events. A similar pattern over time is exhibited by contemporaneous number of geophysical disasters – volcanoes, earthquakes, dry landslides – which, by their nature, are not significantly influenced by climate or anthropogenic factors. We conclude that the patterns observed are largely attributable to progressively better reporting of natural disaster events” https://doi.org/10.1080/17477891.2023.2239807 )
Yamina Saheb, why are the models so consistently wrong including the current generation of models?
(In context AMOC data “””[..] As our confidence in future climate projections depends largely on the ability to model the past climate, we take an in-depth look at the difference in the twentieth century evolution of the AMOC based on observational data (including direct observations and various proxy data) and model data from climate model ensembles. We show that both the magnitude of the trend in the AMOC over different time periods and often even the sign of the trend differs between observations and climate model ensemble mean[..]””” https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rsta.2022.0193 )
Glen Peters, why does IPCC use flawed science?
(In context the hockey stick publication and in particular McShane and Wyners critique on the missing mathematical treatment proxy selection, which is also true for most other reconstruction studies used by IPCC:“”” [..]Consequently, the application of ad hoc methods to screen and exclude data increases model uncertainty in ways that are ummeasurable and uncorrectable.[..] “”” https://www.jstor.org/stable/23024822 )
Commenting on the notion of Jane Fonda as climate scientist, previous anti-nuclear power activist:
Edward Teller was a guest lecturer here in Norway some years ago: “I’m a better actor than Jane Fonda is a nuclear scientist”.
We’ve enough home grown idiots without contracting out nut zero policy to even more unelected globalists
“It’s said that science will dehumanize people and turn them into numbers. That’s false, tragically false. Look for yourself. This is the concentration camp and crematorium at Auschwitz. This is where people were turned into numbers. Into this pond were flushed the ashes of some four million people. And that was not done by gas. It was done by arrogance, it was done by dogma, it was done by ignorance. When people believe that they have absolute knowledge, with no test in reality, this is how they behave. This is what men do when they aspire to the knowledge of gods.
Science is a very human form of knowledge. We are always at the brink of the known; we always feel forward for what is to be hoped. Every judgment in science stands on the edge of error and is personal. Science is a tribute to what we can know although we are fallible. In the end, the words were said by Oliver Cromwell: “I beseech you in the bowels of Christ: Think it possible you may be mistaken.”
I owe it as a scientist to my friend Leo Szilard, I owe it as a human being to the many members of my family who died here, to stand here as a survivor and a witness. We have to cure ourselves of the itch for absolute knowledge and power. We have to close the distance between the push-button order and the human act. We have to touch people.”
Dr Jacob Bronowski – from his landmark series ‘The Ascent of Man’
Seconded!
Your splendid motion carries, Eric!
Is that somewhere lacking in solar power?
Eric, may I be allowed to cross-post a comment I made at NALOPKT? It is on topic and talks to the theme if your post.
‘History has a way of repeating itself (you know the rest)….but I’m thinking that, once again, we (not sure yet quite how many of ‘we’ there are) have come to the point where the NZCs need to be defeated once more before they ruin Western society. Just to expand on the simile: I look on the JSO crowd as the modern-day Brown-shirts of the 1930s (but JSO idiots don’t do history).’