Spiegel journalist Axel Bojanowski writes here how the German flagship weekly has obtained a version of a draft of the upcoming Summary 6th IPCC Report on Climate, the so-called “1.5°C Special Climate Report”, whose final version is expected to be made public in October this year.
Spiegel calls the confidential draft “controversial”.
The preliminary massive climate reports generally do a fair job in reviewing the latest scientific literature, but trouble and controversy begin as soon as results get filtered out or ignored and thus by the time the Summary for Policymakers gets issued, all that remains is something that does not accurately reflect the science. Expect the same in the upcoming report as the current draft gets hammered out.
According to Bojanowski, what finally ends up in the report will be a matter of “heated debate”, politics, egoism and “a competition for one’s reputation”.
IPCC: 1.5°C warming by 2043!
According to the draft of the report, the planet may not emit more than 600 billion tonnes CO2 into the atmosphere, or about 12 years worth of current global emissions, Bojanowski writes.
The report also maintains with “robust certainty” that the 1.5°C warming will be reached in 25 years at current CO2 emissions. The report also says that coal energy will need to be reduced 5% every year, a target considered by many as one that would be excruciating, especially for poor and emerging countries.
The Spiegel science journalist also writes that the latest draft maintains that 2°C of warming would lead to “generally stronger impacts”, especially regarding sea level rise (10 cm more).
IPCC admits: “Radical transformation of society” would daunting
Spiegel also writes that the UN openly admits in the confidential draft that the task of changing the energy system over to one relying mainly on renewables would be daunting in that “such a radical transformation of society has never been planned before.” and the “experience for this is lacking”.
Spiegel’s Bojanowski also notes that there is intense discussion on topics such as “changes in extreme weather” and the “social impacts from climate change”, and reports:
The draft will change, and in some places in a major way, the IPCC informed.”
Negotiating what goes into report “like a bazar”
When it comes to deciding what goes into the report Bojanowski describes the process as being “like a bazar”.
In drafting the climate report the process is similar to that of a bazar. The results of scientific publications are negotiated in intense debates. For climate scientists it gets down to their personal reputations.”
The results of assertive scientists will be later considered as “standard knowledge”. It’s the ego factor.
The deadline for submitting new papers and results is May 15.
Assessment of data goes through a long political process
Bojanowski also describes the drafting of the document as being done by “scientists with differing world views” and that the wording of the summary will be negotiated by “government representatives from all countries”. What comes out at the end of this process and what is left of the science is anyone’s guess.
At the end Bojanowski issues a warning with respect to the IPCC’s credibility and the organization’s assessments:
If they are not adequately supported by the data, then the IPCC will be vulnerable to attack.”
Let the target practice begin!
So the IPCC has evacuated it’s bowel on the world again in this political report, and they (the UN elites) expect us all to kowtow to it’s unscientific and illogical madness. The answer should be a resounding NO. But that is unlikely as there are no brave politicians.
Deadline for new publications is May 15…so expect lots of “worse than we thought” alarmist papers to be published by then.
Will be funny if the next couple of months go below zero anomaly in UAH. 🙂
Don’t worry, Andy, there’s a squad looking into it, just in case.
If the worst comes to the worst they’ll just turn the graph upside down. There’s a precedent for that!
Yeah, something along these lines I guess:
http://www.climate4you.com/images/MSU RSS GlobalMonthlyTempSince1979 With37monthRunningAverage With201505Reference.gif
I don’t think there has been an altogether satisfactory justification for such a large adjustment — not that I’ve come across.
Surely there is a upper limit to the number and size of the adjustments beyond which their credibility is lost to anyone except the totally committed.
I’ll try this:
http://www.climate4you.com/images/MSURSS GlobalMonthlyTempSince1979With37monthRunningAverage With201505Reference.gif
I’m sure a software update would happen before that likelihood. 😉
Every single syllable of their summary is parsed and edited by political functionaries before the report is released. IPCC ARs (Assessment Reports) are political statements disguised as scientific papers and should always be treated as such. They reveal far more about the objectives of the UN than they do about weather or climate. And when one digs deep they will on occasion find the conclusions stated in the summary are contradicted by statements in the body of the document. A form of political double-speak.
It really is a farce. Every time they leak the summary to “reporters” waiting with baited breath in order to get twice the coverage in a period of a few months.
Every single syllable of their summary is parsed and edited by political functionaries before the report is released. IPCC ARs (Assessment Reports) are political statements disguised as scientific papers and should always be treated as such. They reveal far more about the objectives of the UN than they do about weather or climate. And when one digs deep they will on occasion find the conclusions stated in the summary are contradicted by statements in the body of the document. A form of political double-speak.
Every syllable of the summary is parsed and edited as needed by a political functionary. The IPCC AR is a political document masquerading as a scientific one and should always be treated that way.
Sorry for the multiples. A delay in my post showing up that I have not seen before on this site was encountered.
Some days this site is like that, with a seemingly random amount of time before the post appears. It is only the second most annoying occurrence that happens on this site 😉
A local (NSW Aust.) radio talk this morning (Mon 26Feb 2018) about an upturn in Coal prices stated that Malaysia will import from Aust 45m Tonnes up from last year 30m tonnes Japan up too ( I missed the figure) likewise South Korea.So where will the 5%pa reductions come from?
France and Germany are also increasing their IMPORTS OF COAL from, of all places, the USA.
Ya gotta laugh 🙂
Slightly OT
Placing ideology ahead of reality puts everyone at risk.
https://patriotpost.us/articles/54350-germany-had-to-ground-its-green-luftwaffe
(H/T Greenie Watch)
[…] Full post […]
Ready. Fire. Aim. Hardly science or marksmanship for that matter.