IPCC Calls Off Planetary Emergency?

cancel2 2022

You would think that people would be happy that the cataclysmic predictions of Gore and co. were just bombast and bluster, but I can't help thinking that the Sierra Club, Greenpeace and Goldman Sachs are all plotting to keep the public in panic mode. Of course that won't stop the climate alarmists on here though, as their beliefs are far more visceral than evidence based.

Okay, they don’t do so in as many words. But in addition to being more confident than ever (despite a 16-year pause in warming and the growing mismatch between model projections and observations) that man-made climate change is real, they are also more confident nothing really bad is going to happen during the 21[SUP]st[/SUP] Century.

The scariest parts of the “planetary emergency” narrative popularized by Al Gore and other pundits are Atlantic Ocean circulation shutdown (implausibly plunging Europe into a mini-ice age), ice sheet disintegration raising sea levels 20 feet, and runaway warming from melting frozen methane deposits.

As BishopHill and Judith Curry report on their separate blogs, IPCC now believes that in the 21[SUP]st[/SUP] Century, Atlantic Ocean circulation collapse is “very unlikely,” ice sheet collapse is “exceptionally unlikely,” and catastrophic release of methane hydrates from melting permafrost is “very unlikely.” You can read it for yourself in Chapter 12 Table 12.4 of the IPCC’s forthcoming Fifth Assessment Report.

But these doomsday scenarios have always been way more fiction than science. For some time now, extreme weather has been the only card left in the climate alarm deck. Climate activists repeatedly assert that severe droughts, floods, and storms (Hurricane Sandy is their current poster child) are now the “new normal,” and they blame fossil fuels.

On their respective blogs Anthony Watts and Roger Pielke, Jr. provide excerpts about extreme weather from Chapter 2 of the IPCC report. Among the findings:“Current datasets indicate no significant observed trends in global tropical cyclone frequency over the past century … No robust trends in annual numbers of tropical storms, hurricanes and major hurricanes counts have been identified over the past 100 years in the North Atlantic basin.”
  • “In summary, there continues to be a lack of evidence and thus low confidence regarding the sign of trend in the magnitude and/or frequency of floods on a global scale.”
  • “In summary, there is low confidence in observed trends in small-scale severe weather phenomena such as hail and thunderstorms because of historical data inhomogeneities and inadequacies in monitoring systems.”
  • “Based on updated studies, AR4 [the IPCC 2007 report] conclusions regarding global increasing trends in drought since the 1970s were probably overstated.”
  • “In summary, confidence in large scale changes in the intensity of extreme extra-tropical cyclones since 1900 is low.”
Pielke Jr. concludes:

“There is really not much more to be said here — the data says what it says, and what it says is so unavoidably obvious that the IPCC has recognized it in its consensus. Of course, I have no doubts that claims will still be made associating floods, drought, hurricanes and tornadoes with human-caused climate change — Zombie science — but I am declaring victory in this debate. Climate campaigners would do their movement a favor by getting themselves on the right side of the evidence.”

For further discussion, see my post “Global Warming: Planet’s Most Hyped Problem” on this week’s National Journal Energy Insiders blog.

Last edited:
I previously posted the simplified first-order approximation expression for CO2 forcing and pointed out that even a doubling only results in a temp. rise of around 1.2 C. So to really scare the bejasus out of people they started to invent all kinds of positive feedback mechanisms that could be postulated to bump up the figures.


C is the CO[SUB]2[/SUB] concentration in parts per million by volume and C[SUB]0[/SUB] is the reference concentration.The relationship between carbon dioxide and radiative forcing is logarithmic, and thus increased concentrations have a progressively smaller warming effect.
But, but , but, but..................what about the concensus ?.....Its setteled science....

What crapola....and to think, "I told 'em it was bs"......from the beginning....
Last edited:
I am surprised that our resident climate expert Rune hasn't contributed to this thread.

He's still waiting for Algore to tell him what to say.

Boy this was one hell of a destructive hurricane season wasn't it?

Only in liberal fantasy land can one be monumentally wrong and have that as a resume enhance
He's still waiting for Algore to tell him what to say.

Boy this was one hell of a destructive hurricane season wasn't it?

Only in liberal fantasy land can one be monumentally wrong and have that as a resume enhance

I think he is still pursuing his unrequited love affair with the JPP Debate Champion.