“Not Worthy Of Any Consensus” …4 Renowned Scientists Expose Major IPCC Shortcomings: “Models Clearly Erroneous”

The Munich Climate Conference 2019

By Dr. Andreas Mueller
(Summarized by P. Gosselin)

Last weekend the climate conference by the Germany-based European Institute for Climate and Energy EIKE took place in Munich, despite threats by leftist radicals.

More than a dozen leading international climate experts presented views that severely challenge mainstream alarmist climate science.

1. Alps glaciers smaller than today during much of the Holocene

Among the speakers was Prof. em. Christian Schlüchter is a leading Swiss geologist who studied the glaciers of the Alps in great detail for decades. In his talk he reported his findings from very old timber found in and below glaciers, and what those ancient tree remnants tell us about the glacial epochs of the Alps.

Image: EIKE

Schlüchter’s findings involve paleoclimatic records (timber, turfs, insects, etc.) found and dated using 14C as a standard method. The most important slide of his talk shows the last 12,000 years:


Image: EIKE

His findings show that for long periods of time in the last 12,000 years, temperatures were higher than in 2005.  Early on, from 10,000 to 8,800 BC, and again in the last few hundred years, temperatures were significantly lower.

The key message is that the alpine glacier extent was often smaller than in 2005. The timberline was at least 300 meters higher, which indicates a minimum of 1.8° C higher temperatures than today. An example of this is Hannibal, who managed to cross the Alps with elephants during the Roman times.

Schlüchter summarized that more than 50% of the last 11000 years alpine glaciers were smaller than 2005 and that events of glacier growth were fast and short. Also the little ice age (from the end of the medieval warm period to about 1850) was the longest glacier extension since the last ice age 12,000 years ago,

2. IPCC models have substantial shortcomings

Also speaking at the conference was Italian physicist and climate modeler Nicola Scafetta, a well-known critic of IPCC climate models. His talk in Munich again examined the substantial shortcomings of IPCC climate models:


Image: EIKE

Scafetta discussed several areas where the climate models constantly fail. A key case is the Medieval Warm Period, which he showed together with the Roman Warm Period and the Modern Warm Period:

On the following slide, Prof. Scafetta shows how the IPCC models (light blue line) fail to reproduce the Medieval Warm Period (red real data) in the left part of the chart:


Image: EIKE

According to Scafetta, the models the IPCC uses are not capable of reproducing climate variations, which follow periodic solar activity.

The following chart compares the IPCC 2013 models to that of his own model (yellow area):


Image: EIKE

Both are not perfect and so indeed contradict any claim that the “science is settled”. But Scafetta’s model appears to be much more on track than the IPCC models.

Scafetta concludes:



3. Nir Shaviv: CO2 climate sensitivity largely overestimated 

Renowned Israeli astrophysicist Nir Shaviv continued where Scafetta left off, presenting the IPCC world and its errors. Shaviv emphasized that the climate sensitivity of CO2 is unknown and largely overestimated by the IPCC:


Image: EIKE

The Israeli astrophysicist judged the IPCC leaving out the sun as a driver “a severe shortcoming”, saying that the IPCC overestimates climate sensitivity of CO2 at the expense of solar influences.

While IPCC modelers managed to hide this for 20th century data, it will lead to a serious overestimate of temperatures in the 21st when solar influences will be cooling, according to the the Israeli scientist. Shaviv therefore expects a much lower temperature rise than that predicted by the IPCC.

Shaviv summarized:


Image: EIKE

4. Sun, clouds have huge impact on climate, IPCC ignores

Danish physicist and climate researcher Henrik Svensmark talked how he found it more and more difficult to raise funding for his research because the results contradict the IPCC.

Svensmark investigated the mechanism of how cosmic rays impact the creation of climate-crucial clouds. This happens through creation of ions which serve as clouding seeds in the atmosphere:


Image: EIKE

By experiments and by correlation measurements, Svensmark investigated the mechanism of cloud creation by cosmic rays. IPCC researchers already cite a reduction of cloud creation as a possible positive feedback mechanism, which could escalate global warming to catastrophic levels, and so Svensmark’s research needs to be addressed seriously.

The importance of cloud creation as a cooling climate factor is regarded as undisputed, Svensmark’s conclusion:


Image: EIKE

Scientific summary

Overall, as a physicist, I found the 4 ground-breaking scientists presented results that make it seem highly improbable that the IPCC climate models are complete and reliable. The IPCC models are hardly worthy of any 97% consensus.

6 responses to ““Not Worthy Of Any Consensus” …4 Renowned Scientists Expose Major IPCC Shortcomings: “Models Clearly Erroneous””

  1. bonbon

    The Anti-deutscher, so called “Antifa”, found the other hotel, put up signs “we found you”, but 30 Munich police officers held them back and the conference went ahead.

    This “antifa” crowd showed their true black-clad colors as Ukrainian extremists turned up in Hong Kong to support the US Senate-supported antifa rebellion there, openly sporting their Nazi tattoos. They are now Anti-Beijing, the same crowd attacking China over Uighur Training camps. Not surprisingly those Uighur extremists are hardened ISIS fighters from Syria.
    So the circle closes – British/US-backed Kiev radicals now pop up as anti-china “activists”.
    Even more unsurprisingly they turn up in Bolivia in support of the putsch there.

    Hey, this is not rocket science.
    Chickens come home to roost.

  2. bonbon

    Svensmark’s and Shaviv’s Galactic Cosmic Ray, GCR, physics opens a vast doorway for everyone, beyond any so-called earth-bound climate.

    We now are given a grasp of vast timescales, an access channel into scales beyond any Lilliputian imperial dictate.

    It just shows up the puny, laughable, garten-zwerg (garden gnome) character of the prancing “Prominenten”.

    The death agony of Olympus is palpable!

  3. Ed.Nalton.

    The equations for thermodynamics were written by Hottel,Sarofin and others,indicating that CO2 has no thermal effect at current atmospheric temperatures. Schack,a German thermodynamicist stated that CO2 may have some effect,but only at combustion chamber temps. of about 3000 deg.C.
    The equations by Hottel et al are available in Modest,Manrique and others.
    Is there an English translation of Schack that can be made available on this site,or has that already been done.

  4. tom0mason

    There are also many that investigate many other aspects of the solar/climate connection …

    See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEWoPzaDmOA

    This planet has major magnetic fields that interact with the solar magnetic fields, this planet has an ionosphere and the sun radiates ionized particles, the sun has electric fields as does the Earth.
    Now what is the UN’s preferred version of ‘Climate Science™’ missing by downgrading solar activity to a mere variation in TSI.

  5. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #389 | Watts Up With That?
  6. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #389 – All My Daily News

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy