Die Welt Journalist On AR5: “Small Sensation: IPCC Backpedals Considerably” – Mann’s Hockey Stick Trashed For Good

Ulli Kulke, veteran journalist at Germany’s flagship daily Die Welt, writes at his Die Welt blog that “scientists from Potsdam not long ago were talking about a global temperature increase of four, five or even more degrees Celsius.” But with the recent news leaking out about the upcoming IPCC AR5, that scenario is looking more like fantasy than ever.

If the reports leaking out are accurate, then it appears that, Kulke writes, “the alarmists are backpedaling and one could roughly sum it all up as follows: Nothing is even half as bad.” Reports of exaggerated CO2 climate sensitivity are now filtering through even in Germany and it’s becoming increasingly obvious even to Europeans that the whole issue had been grossly exaggerated.

Kulke writes that he already mentioned recently that the IPCC had significantly scaled back CO2 climate sensitivity in its first draft of the upcoming report. “The way it appears now the IPCC has in the last few days once again scaled back its estimates in the updated drafts and has conceded stark errors in the past report.” Here Kulke cites the Wall Street Journal, the Daily Telegraph, the Mail on Sunday and The Australian.

Kulke continues:

Moreover, they expressly bring up the pause in global warming – and also admit that they cannot explain it and that the computer models, which the IPCC relies on, failed to predict it.”

Nobody knows what the final draft is going to look like. But the IPCC will have to ultimately decide whether to bring up these inconvenient, even embarrassing, facts. Failure to do so would cost the IPCC as a scientific body a lot of respect, of which it is already very low on. On the other hand bringing the glaring shortfalls will make the IPCC appear as prone to error and cost it credibility.

Mann’s flawed hockey stick discarded for good

Kulke also writes that the Medieval Warm Period has reappeared in the latest draft, thus disposing once and for all of Michael Mann’s infamous hockey stick chart.

Not long ago it was inconceivable, but apparently the IPCC is now admitting that during the years between 950 and 1250, i.e. the Middles Ages, most parts of the world were just as warm as they are today. That is during a time when CO2 values in the atmosphere where only a fraction of what they are today.”

Kulke believes that the IPCC’s claims of high certainty on the question of man’s impact on the climate through greenhouse gases will have no impact because “very few scientists have doubts on this“. The real question remains: How big is that impact?

The answer appears to be growing smaller with each passing day.

 

13 responses to “Die Welt Journalist On AR5: “Small Sensation: IPCC Backpedals Considerably” – Mann’s Hockey Stick Trashed For Good”

  1. Stephen Richards

    it’s becoming increasingly obvious even to Europeans that the whole issue had been grossly exaggerated. – See more at: http://notrickszone.com/#sthash.IZP3REwe.dpuf

    To all except the EUSS commissariat. voire Hedeberg the danish loon and the imfamous Barrosa the failed politician.

  2. Mindert Eiting

    I really hope that the IPCC will survive for many years, because every five years they have to produce a report of 2000 pages in which we can follow the decline effect. Climate sensitivity will be estimated less in every report, shrinking to zero but never becoming exactly that figure. Perhaps the number of cooperating scientists will also decline but let the faithful go on till the bitter end.

    1. DirkH

      A generation of useless wannabe rent seekers has been lured into climate science studies; hoping for a warm cosy place in front of an XBox running a GCM.

      And the EU will fire its techno-bureaucrats last on the way to its downfall. We will all be roaming the streets when they will still live high on the hog.

      Fun fact: There was a time when being sent to America or Australia was seen as a punishment.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_transportation

      1. Bernd Felsche

        Strange coincidence. Just yesterday I was offering Tasmania as a destination for Transportation to “accommodate” those found guilty of financial infidelity relating to public funds (after the German Taxpayers’ Association proposal).

        May I offer Tasmania as a destination for Transportation? 🙂

        I don’t live there (obviously) but it has an excellent performance record in that function. Australia’s former government decided to squander billions in connecting a few thousand homes on the island to the Internet by fibre optic cable so if such legislation catches on in Australia, transportees may not be all alone.

        The island State has long been a basket-case economy, with enviro-loons preventing the establishment of any viable industry. If the UK or other EUropean country wishes to send their bureaucrat miscreants to Tasmania, then that could be a financial shot in the arm for Tasmania. An initial “settling fee” of about $50,000 should cover initial expenses with $30,000 annually for on-going expenses. Operators may offer bulk discounts.

        Upon release, survivors will have skills in timber-felling, carpentry, hunting, argiculture, stone-masonary, wool spinning, blanket weaving and rudimentary tailoring; depending on the priorities of the independent detention provider. During their service in Tasmania, they will be expected to contribute to the State’s traditional exports of cheese as well as new ones such as live, worried sheep.

        Keep in mind that Tasmania is a cold, isolated place without much infrastructure (so far); so transporting the first million miscreants should be staged over a period of at least a couple of years.

  3. John F. Hultquist

    “Reports of exaggerated CO2 climate sensitivity are now filtering through even in Germany and it’s becoming increasingly obvious even to Europeans that the whole issue had been grossly exaggerated.”

    “filtering through”

    What an apt analogy. Reasonable scientists and many others have been aware of this for years. There are at least 3 major lines of argument against CAGW. First, history and research of pre-history informs us that Earth has never been at the mercy of CO2, thus why should it now? #2: The short years of correlation between increasing CO2 and temperature (about 1974 to 1989) has not continued since and also failed in prior periods. #3: From the science side, the logarithmic function of decreasing impact ought to have been enough to send the CAGW hypothesis to an early grave.

    And that brings us to the “filter”: The players on the CAGW Team start with Maurice Strong and the UN, then Al Gore and friends, and the minions of useful idiots that slavishly follow any doomsday theme. Science should be its own filter. It hasn’t been regarding climate because the pseudo-religious ideological types have clogged the filter. They have also directed the flow of research toward their beliefs such that alternative hypothesis could not easily be investigated. This is a sad story.
    =============================================

    Off topic:
    Elsewhere, I’ve seen comments from readers new to the skeptic arguments indicating a lack of background on some issues. One being the “adjustments” to the temperature records for various reasons (time-of-day, heat island effects, station closings, in-filling, and so on). Another issue is how the Polar Bear was introduced to the climate change theme, what was really going on, and why the idea of the demise of Bear has faded. Sometimes a reasonable question does not get answered. I know I do not respond often because I am busy and to answer properly would take an hour or more of my time. I also know the topic has been fully covered. Also, sometimes these questions tend to detour or hijack the thread and it may be the intention of a “troll” to do just that. Who knows? Anyway, this is just a comment that may encourage new folks on skeptic blogs to go back and read entries from 3 or 4 or 5 years ago. I do have an earth science background but only got started paying attention to the internet news and blogs in Sept. 2008 when my new connection via DSL allowed sufficient bandwidth to download the complicated pages. During these past 5 years that’s a lot of reading.

  4. Bernd Felsche

    Failure to do so would cost the IPCC as a scientific body a lot of respect, of which it is already very low on

    The IPCC isn’t, nor was it ever a scientific body.

    Roy Spencer recently wrote:

    I have always been convinced that the IPCC was created by bureaucrats to achieve specific policy ends. I was even told so by one of those bureaucrats, Bob Watson, back in the early 1990s. Not that there aren’t ‘true believers’ in the movement. In my experience, the vast majority of the scientists and politicians involved in the IPCC process appear to really believe they are doing what is right for humanity by supporting restrictions on fossil fuel use.

  5. Richard111

    John F. Hultquist writes:

    “”And that brings us to the “filter”: The players on the CAGW Team start with Maurice Strong and the UN, then Al Gore and friends, and the minions of useful idiots that slavishly follow any doomsday theme.””

    Indeed, and then the concerted drive to install unreliable, ‘green’, renewable energy sources. What is the ultimate motive? Utopia? Or world domination and population reduction.

    1. DirkH

      When it was founded, the UN (brainchild of the CFR) was intended to become the ONLY military force on the planet, able to overwhelm any uprising.

      In 1961 (or so) the UN killed 100,000 people during the Kongo affair (Lumumba’s government from which Chombé split who was then warred on).

      This discredited the UN as a military force for good. So the CFR had to find a new tactic; they decided to use deception; and from 1971 on, they set up and used NGO’s as a mock “voice of the people” demanding ever stricter control on individual freedoms all over the planet.

      (Hegelian dialectic; rise of the modern fascist ultrastate in EU and USA).

  6. Asmilwho

    On the other hand, you can hear Max Schön from the Deutsche Gesellschaft Club of Rome being given an easy ride today in a radio interview here about the “Energiewende”:

    http://www.dradio.de/aod/html/?station=3&year=2013&month=09&day=19&page=1&

    Even in an article about the increasing digitalisation of society (http://www.dradio.de/dkultur/sendungen/politischesfeuilleton/2255981/), they can’t resist calling the article “Digitaler Klimawandel” and putting in the following:

    “”We are already seeing changes!”, sagte Al Gore unheilvoll in seinem berühmten Vortrag und deutete auf die Temperaturkurve: 900 Jahre lang ziemlich konstant, und dann der steile Anstieg. Aber wir sehen ja eigentlich nichts, das ist ja das Problem. Seit Gore das sagte, blüht der Apfelbaum im Garten 1,8 Tage früher. Das merkt nur, wer die Daten analysiert. ”

    It’s not over yet

    1. DirkH

      “On the other hand, you can hear Max Schön from the Deutsche Gesellschaft Club of Rome being given an easy ride today in a radio interview ”

      Well anything else would have sent the journalist straight to the Gulag.

  7. Jimbo

    Not long ago it was inconceivable, but apparently the IPCC is now admitting that during the years between 950 and 1250, i.e. the Middles Ages, most parts of the world were just as warm as they are today.

    Or warmer. Pierre do you grow olives in Germany? What about a retreating glacier revealing a Medieval Forest? Read on…

    Medieval Climatic Optimum
    Michael E Mann – University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA

    It is evident that Europe experienced, on the whole, relatively mild climate conditions during the earliest centuries of the second millennium (i.e., the early Medieval period). Agriculture was possible at higher latitudes (and higher elevations in the mountains) than is currently possible in many regions, and there are numerous anecdotal reports of especially bountiful harvests (e.g., documented yields of grain) throughout Europe during this interval of time. Grapes were grown in England several hundred kilometers north of their current limits of growth, and subtropical flora such as fig trees and olive trees grew in regions of Europe (northern Italy and parts of Germany) well north of their current range. Geological evidence indicates that mountain glaciers throughout Europe retreated substantially at this time, relative to the glacial advances of later centuries (Grove and Switsur, 1994). A host of historical documentary proxy information such as records of frost dates, freezing of water bodies, duration of snowcover, and phenological evidence (e.g., the dates of flowering of plants) indicates that severe winters were less frequent and less extreme at times during the period from about 900 – 1300 AD in central Europe………..
    http://www.meteo.psu.edu/holocene/public_html/shared/articles/medclimopt.pdf

    AND

    Retreating Alaskan Glacier Reveals Remains Of Medieval Forest
    http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2013/08/26/retreating-alaskan-glacier-reveals-remains-of-medieval-forest/

    The Medieval Warm Period was warmer than today.

  8. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup | Watts Up With That?
  9. Brian H

    The MWP was warm enough to grow big trees whose stumps are just now emerging from under retreating glaciers. So it was warm enough for centuries to grow them before they were buried in the LIA.

    TMSAISTI

    (That’s my story and I’m sticking to it)