Spiegel: IPCC-Backpedal On Species Extinction…”Astonishingly Great Doubt Over Earlier Predictions…Acute Lack Of Data”

Alarmists like claiming that a bit of global warming can lead to mass-scale species extinctions and even threatens the very survival of human civilization. It’s one of the media’s favorite scare stories after sea level rise and super storms.

It turns out that the IPCC is now having “great doubts” about that. Yet another scare-story gets debunked!

Yesterday online journalist Axel Bojanowski at Spiegel here reports in a piece titled: Secret UN Report: IPCC Doubts Prognoses On Species Extinction.

H/t: DirkH

According to information obtained by Spiegel, the UN body “is now sowing astonishingly great doubt over its earlier predictions.”

Online Spiegel writes that scientists are now distancing themselves from their previous projections, and quotes the IPCC:

There is very little confidence in the models accurately predicting the extinction risks.”

Spiegel reports of an “acute lack of data” and that “biological findings have increased doubt over the expected species extinction“.

Spiegel adds:

Thus far, the IPCC admits, there has been no evidence showing that climate change has led to the extinction of a single species. […] With most life forms there’s a lack of data, says Ragnar Kinzelbach of the University of Rostock.”

Kinzelbach then says that climate change has been used as an excuse for inaction in other more urgent areas:

“Monocultures, over-fertilization or soil destruction destroy more species than do several degrees Celsius of temperature rise ever could.”

 

18 thoughts on “Spiegel: IPCC-Backpedal On Species Extinction…”Astonishingly Great Doubt Over Earlier Predictions…Acute Lack Of Data””

  1. Correct me if I am mistaken, please, but do I detect that this past year or so, the IPCC has been back-pedalling on some of its previous claims?

    1. The alarmists have been backpedalling for a long time now. That’s why they constantly need new scary subjects; the old ones don’t work anymore. There was the Polar Bear scare (which created the new Ursus Bogus species) -all gone now, when people hear about polar bear crises these days they most likely think of poor little Knut in Berlin (?) zoo, at least in Germany. For me, the greatest polar bear moment was COP 15 in Copenhagen 2009, when activists had made a polar bear of ice, presumably intended to melt away during the conference as a symbol of CAGW. But the damned beast refused to melt in the freezing Danish weather!

      The malaria scare, remember? No? The alarmists will thank you for that. But hey, at least there must be a watery grave where the Maldives once was situated, those poor people who held an underwater government meeting to remind us of our guilt? Maybe a guide will point out the location when you arrive via one of the ten new airports in this “almost-sunk-by-co2″ paradise.

      But at least catastrophic man-made sea level rise will shift a sandbank or two in the Ganges delta. Then in flow the millions of climate change refugees. Haven’t seen them? That’s an evil denialist fossil fuel lobby ploy; they are waiting deep down in the oceans, ready to overwhelm a social security system near you. Boo! Or maybe they are riding a Hansenite death train. Wherever they are, the models predicted it, only it is going to be much worse.

      Meanwhile the children who never will know what snow is are shovelling the family driveway clear of that white stuff which is none the lighter for not being there, really.

      So don’t forget to forget last week’s climate change crises, please remember that a good memory never saved a bad research budget.

  2. There is absolutely no need for the IPCC. Why is a whole bureaucracy needed to “review” work done by scientists who should routinely review the work in their field as a basis for interpreting their own results. This ridiculous repetition of he said she said, always with spin, will not stop until the IPCC is gone. Unfortunately, the IPCC now directs a lot of funding based on the political, rather than scientific need for information. One would have thought that, following the first or second reviews , research would have focused on defining the known “unknowns” rather than reruns of what supposedly was already known.

    1. The US navy will say whatever is needed to tag along with their political masters, and to safeguard the navy budget.

      If ever you meet an admiral, try this one: “The climate crises makes it necessary to reduce our carbon footprint, therefore we must cut our carrier groups by half, immediately.”

      Battle stations!

    2. No mystery. The Navy believes the “science” that the US government has bought. The military brass isn’t “right wing”. They are part of the government, and are whatever the government is.

    3. Buddy, here is something else from the US Navy. 😉

      “Our projection of 2013 for the removal of ice in summer is not accounting for the last two minima, in 2005 and 2007,” the researcher from the Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California, explained to the BBC.

      “So given that fact, you can argue that may be our projection of 2013 is already too conservative.”
      http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7139797.stm

      Oooops! Now they say…..

      US Navy predicts summer ice free Arctic by 2016
      http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2013/dec/09/us-navy-arctic-sea-ice-2016-melt

      During the 2013 minimum Arctic sea ice extent and volume was up ~50% on 2012. Buddy, you are wet behind the ears and a sucker for money seeking speculative funding. That’s what these reports are all about, grab government funding for improbable research.

  3. “Monocultures, over-fertilization or soil destruction destroy more species than do several degrees Celsius of temperature rise ever could.”

    No problemo. Just get a UN committee to say that over-fertilization and soil destruction are caused by global warming, and the theory remains intact. Real science must always yield to the doctrines of the Holy Church of Settled Science.

  4. “Spiegel reports of an “acute lack of data” and that “biological findings have increased doubt over the expected species extinction“.

    In my essay on Contrasting Good and Bad Science: Disease, Climate Change and the Case of the Golden Toad http://landscapesandcycles.net/contrasting-good-and-bad-science–disease–climate.html

    I reported just how fallacious the claims about climate change had caused the Golden Toad to go extinct. Yet lead IPCC authors like Camille Parmesan have continued write alarmist opinions like “Species’ extinctions have already been linked to recent climate change; the golden toad is iconic”

    I recently posted on WUWT “The Lost Climate Integrity of the American Association for the Advancement of Science “What We Really Know” and What the AAAS Failed to Mention.” http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/03/23/the-aaass-lost-climate-integrity/#comments

    The science suggesting ecological catastrophes is so bad, the IPCC must back off .

  5. Hi Buddy,
    A conservative Navy? buying biofuel for $15 / gallon

    “Last week, the Navy signed a contract with two biofuel companies to purchase 450,000 gallons of advanced biofuels at $12 million to assist in President Obama’s goal to establish a domestic biofuels industry and to advance it in ways that do not require Congressional approval.”
    http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2011/12/07/navy-buys-fuel-at-15-per-gallon-they-should-read-ier%E2%80%99s-new-report/

  6. What is happening is an awareness that “the scary scenarios being offered up” have failed to manifest themselves; so some of the savvy scientists realise they now have to begin distancing themselves from the silliest and least credible elements of the Anthropogenic Global Warming scare. (The religious activists are doubling down now with more Chicken Little claptrap, however).

    This is just a matter of self-preservation. Immensely pragmatic. Much like the erstwhile “Communists” from the former German Democratic Republic who morphed quite smoothly into defenders of freedom once the Berlin Wall came down.

    Look at what’s happening to biofuels:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/10716756/Biofuels-do-more-harm-than-good-UN-warns.html

    Kurt in Switzerland

    1. These are also my thoughts. In sailing contests it is called taking away the wind from the sails of your competitor. Perhaps they already have a complete plan of withdrawal. Attack them randomly.

  7. What does a past much warmer period show us about life?

    Abstract
    ZHAO Yu-long et al – Advances in Earth Science – 2007
    The impacts of the Paleocene-Eocene thermal maximum (PETM)event on earth surface cycles and its trigger mechanism
    The Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM) event is an abrupt climate change event that occurred at the Paleocene-Eocene boundary. The event led to a sudden reversal in ocean overturning along with an abrupt rise in sea surface salinity (SSSs) and atmospheric humidity. An unusual proliferation of biodiversity and productivity during the PETM is indicative of massive fertility increasing in both oceanic and terrestrial ecosystems. Global warming enabled the dispersal of low-latitude populations into mid-and high-latitude. Biological evolution also exhibited a dramatic pulse of change, including the first appearance of many important groups of ” modern” mammals (such as primates, artiodactyls, and perissodactyls) and the mass extinction of benlhic foraminifera…..
    22(4) 341-349 DOI: ISSN: 1001-8166 CN: 62-1091/P
    http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-DXJZ200704001.htm

Comments are closed.