Dutch investigative journalist Marijn Poels recently interviewed leading climatologist Dr. Judith Curry, see following video:
In the interview, Curry told that climate scientists have been acting “overconfident” and have been ignoring too many unknowns and all the uncertainty which the science is fraught with.
“There”s a lot of scope for people to be wrong” concerning the future of what the climate might be like, she said.
Climate scientists ignoring wide scope of natural factors
She tells viewers that the scientists were contracted to be “narrowly focused” on man’s impact and thus ended up ignoring “what may be the most important factors”, such as solar and oceanic cycles.
Unrealistic climate models
She also called the climate models “very ambiguous” and characterized the IPCC business-as-usual scenario as being based on “flawed projections” and “unrealistic assumptions” and that the other climate models “seem to be running too hot”.
She said, “The apocalyptic predictions depend on unrealistic emissions scenarios and unrealistic climate model simulations.”
She adds that in the end “we are left with a modest amount of warming that may be counteracted by natural variability.”
Greatest risks stem more from natural factors
She calls the West Antarctic Ice Sheet the factor that poses the greatest risk, but that CO2 has little impact on it. Rather, it’s the geological instability below it that is the biggest factor. A collapse could potentially lead to a meter of sea level rise this century, she said.
Bullying a consensus
On why her climate colleagues turned against her, Curry said: “What really got to them was my criticism of the behavior of scientists. I saw them lacking in transparency. I saw them trying to sabotage people who disagreed with them. […] I spoke up and called them on it. That’s what the unforgiveable behavior was on my part.”
She said that what we have in climate science is “consensus enforcement” and that alternative views are simply shut out, and thus run contradictory to how science is supposed to work. Earlier she told a Congressional committee that scientists were “being bullied” into consensus.