Michael Mann as Defeated Saruman Facing Anthony "Gandalf" Watts at the Tower of Orthanc. Source ChatGPT. Eric Worrall and Charles the Moderator.

Michael Mann: Cancelling RCP 8.5 has only Bought us 50 Years

Essay by Eric Worrall

But we still need to act immediately.

Sorry, climate change is still dangerous, no matter what nonsense Trump emits

By Genevieve GuentherMichael E. Mann | Opinion | May 22, 2026

“After 15 years of Dumocrats promising that ‘Climate Change’ is going to destroy the Planet, the United Nations TOP Climate Committee just admitted that its own projections (RCP8.5) were WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!” Trump wrote, quite incorrectly, on Truth Social. “Unlike the Dumocrats, who use Climate Alarmism nonsense to push their Green New Scam, my Administration will always be based on TRUTH, SCIENCE, and FACT!”

Even in light of the Trump administration’s gutting of American science and the president’s well-documented reckless disregard for the truth, this post stands out as patently, particularly absurd. But Trump’s new climate-denial talking point is a weaponized version of new developments in climate science. Trump’s typically bombastic disinformation—if casually combined with a real debate within the climate community about one climate projection—will muddy the public understanding of science enough that Americans on both sides of the aisle might be left with an incorrect and dangerous belief that they no longer need to worry about the climate crisis.

The new high-emissions scenario hypothesizes a backsliding of progress, where current climate policies are rolled back, clean-energy development slows, and fossil-fuel use expands. This scenario leads most likely to a temperature rise of about 3.5 degrees Celsius by 2100, but the range of possible heating by that date spans from 2.5 degrees to 4.3 degrees Celsius. The scenario also projects more heating after 2100, since global emissions fail to shrink to net zero. Indeed, the new high-emissions scenario projects that the world could heat up to RCP8.5’s 5 degrees Celsius by 2150, just 50 years later.

Read more: https://thebulletin.org/2026/05/sorry-climate-change-is-still-dangerous-no-matter-what-nonsense-trump-emits/

Sooo – its still an urgent emergency we have to deal with right now, even though thermageddon has been deferred by at least 50 years?

For a long time I’ve been relishing the prospect of Michael Mann having to publicly downgrade his climate claims, but now that moment has arrived, I don’t feel the satisfaction I thought I would feel. The damage done to the global economy by these clowns – decades of stunted economic growth – is too great to feel happiness at a grudging admission their predictions were too extreme.

Even sadder that Mann has chosen to cling to the tattered remnants of his mantle of alarmism, instead of coming clean and properly admitting he was completely wrong. To paraphrase Gandalf in Lord of the Rings during the confrontation with the defeated wizard Saruman, even now Mann could have done some good, by following climate alarmist James Lovelock’s footsteps and admitting climate alarmism was a mistake. Such an admission might have helped to reduce the suffering in backwards outposts of climate ignorance like the European Union, by accelerating their awakening from their Net Zero nightmare.

But Michael Mann, as always, in my opinion has placed his personal vanity ahead of attempting any kind of restitution for all the harm his “hide the decline” hockey stick climate alarmism has caused over the years.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
4.9 11 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
12 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Curious George
May 23, 2026 10:04 am

Please understand that Dr. Michael E. Mann is never wrong. Just ignore him.

skitheo
May 23, 2026 10:05 am

“The projection is strong with this one (Mann).”

Denis
May 23, 2026 10:24 am

Hmm. So according to Dr. Mann, if he is to no longer consider an erroneously high set of inputs to his and others climate modeling work, we gain 50 years of a benign climate. How can cancelling that which never was and never could be have any influence on our actual climate? Why not simply cancel all data regarding use of fossil fuels and we will be ok forever at least in Dr. Mann’s mind, such as it is.

Sweet Old Bob
Reply to  Denis
May 23, 2026 10:50 am

So cancel the next RCP .

That gives us another 50 years !

Ezepeezy !

😉 😉

May 23, 2026 10:32 am

Sorry, climate change is still dangerous, no matter what nonsense Trump emits

No, this nonsense has been fully addressed many times, there is NO climate emergency developing.

Where Is The “Climate Emergency”?
LINK

===

What an irrational Mann he is……..

May 23, 2026 10:38 am

Mann is a tree ring guy…his findings an outlier compared to Briffa’s work on the same subject…presented by an agency who has everything to gain by hyperbole.

May 23, 2026 10:52 am

Mann’s identity and power, personal as well as professional and social, requires a “hair-on-fire” narrative. A calm, results oriented, incremental progress, pragmatic approach reconciling economics and social good with environmental health would stop his religious crusade in its tracks.

This goes for all of the alarmists. The panic must be maintained to justify their draconian, personally expensive and restrictive demands. I’m surprised, actually, that he “points out” the catastrophe is only delayed 50 years to 2150. 2100 was a threat to only the youngest currently alive; 2150 is a threat to only those born in 2090 or later!

And he is now indirectly saying the obvious, bad impacts if climate change are also delayed another 50 years! The catastrophe he and they want to claim today can’t be happening if the deep fear of current changes only brings disaster – previously determined for 2100 – th 2150.

But meantime Mann keeps his job and his importance. Good for him. I wonder what Gore Sr. says: his movie was predicated on 8.5 in the near future. But Ehrlich was not discomforted or criticized by the faithful with his failures, but said his outcome is valid, his timing was just off. He was a visionary prophet like old time end of timers: so goes Mann and Gore, I expect.

May 23, 2026 10:56 am

CO2 has been increasing steadily for years yet temperatures have cooled by 0.5C since early 2024.

That should cast doubt on Mann’s speculation about CO2 and temperature. The temperatures are not behaving the way he thinks.

Who is the denier now, Michael?

May 23, 2026 11:21 am

Exactly one year ago today – May 23, 2025 – President Trump’s Executive Order “Restoring Gold Standard Science” stated this requirement in Section 4(c):

“When using scientific information in agency decision-making, employees shall transparently acknowledge and document uncertainties, including how uncertainty propagates throughout any models used in the analysis.”

I have no idea who initiated this provision, or to what depth the President himself was briefed on its plain implications for the decades and billions-of-dollars-worth of climate modeling using time-step-iterated computed simulations. But properly understood, this provision obliterates the model-based claims of Dr. Mann, the IPCC, and all the agencies worldwide that keep yammering about climate “danger” from emissions of CO2, CH4, N2O, and other trace IR-active gases.

Have the scientists promoting the “climate” scare answered to the failure to have acknowledged the rapid buildup of uncertainty in the modeled temperature projections? Not a peep, as far as I am aware.

Every skeptic of climate alarm would do well to appreciate that it is the accepted methods of expressing uncertainty that are the basis of this requirement. It’s not agenda-driven.

Start with Pat Frank’s 2019 paper here. “Propagation of Error and the Reliability of Global Air Temperature Projections” https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/earth-science/articles/10.3389/feart.2019.00223/full

And please consider taking a few minutes to read this pdf. From last year. I thought Grok 3 did a great job with this analysis of propagated uncertainty. I asked first about the authoritative guidance and then posed an exercise based on the published value of a single source of uncertainty external to the models. The answer: there is about +/- 4 deg C uncertainty (95% confidence basis) after just one year of time-step-iterated computation. This assumes a model with perfect internal fidelity to the climate system’s response to “forcing.”

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1j56NA0qRZvVMdosxjzOkLoXvwbKg9Ds1/view?usp=drive_link

There. No matter which model, or which scenario, and no matter how long emissions continue, NO SCIENTIST has ever produced a reliable projection of climate response using a time-step-iterated simulation.

Thank you for listening.

jvcstone
May 23, 2026 11:33 am

Michael Mann lost any credibility he might have had many years ago. Only a fool keeps bloviating when his foot is firmly entrenched in his mouth. My climate prediction for what it is worth–before the world sees 2100, the big climate scare will have reverted back to the glaciers are coming once again.

May 23, 2026 11:38 am

Everyone arguing today about heating in the future will be dead by then, so it doesn’t really matter what actually happens. The future does not belong to the present, and those that think it does suffer from extreme hubris and narcissism.

At what point in the future will narcissistic people start to worry about the coming re-glaciation?

John Hultquist
May 23, 2026 11:39 am

The co-author, Genevieve Guenther, has found something to do with a English degree — become a climate dufus.