UN climate panel can’t explain warming slowdown
The United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is expected to release another report on climate change this fall. But we already have an idea of what they’re expected to say:
An unreleased draft of the U.N.’s next major climate report reportedly states that scientists are more certain than ever that man’s actions are warming the planet — even as the report struggles to explain a slow-down in warming that climate skeptics have seized upon.
Global surface temperatures rose rapidly during the 70s, but have been relatively flat over the past decade and a half, according to data from the U.K.’s weather-watching Met Office. Climate skeptics have spent months debating the weather pattern, some citing it as evidence that global warming itself has decelerated or even stopped.
A draft of the upcoming AR5 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which is set for final release in Oct. 2014 and used by governments around the world, offers a variety of explanations for the mystery, Reuters reported, from ocean storage of heat to volcanoes.
The Economist notes that there is some doubt among members of the panel that greenhouse-gas emissions are as big of a problem than they’ve claimed in the past. The magazine points out that this is a huge deal given that the IPCC has been used by many countries, including the United States, to determine climate change policies.
But Chip Knappenberger and Patrick Michaels of the Cato Institute note that there is no indication that the IPCC will back down from previous projections made about climate change, which, as they explain, means that they will continue to “mislead lawmakers and the rest of the world.”
Nevermind past contradictions or misleading claims, most in the media will, of course, take everything the IPCC as gospel, as though it was handed down from God himself.
In the meantime, Al Gore is back in the news. The noted climate alarmist recently told the Washington Post that scientists are adding a sixth-level to the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale, which measures the wind-speed and strength of tropical cyclones.
“[Hurricanes are] stronger now. The extreme events are more extreme,” said Gore. “The hurricane scale used to be 1-5 and now they’re adding a 6. The fingerprint of man-made global warming is all over these storms and extreme weather events.”
Cool story, bro. Only that’s not true.
The National Hurricane Center is not planning to add another level to the hurricane scale. Gretchen Goldman, an expert on climate change at Georgia Tech, says that Gore needs to be more careful in his statements, noting that the correlation between climate change and hurricane intensity is not settled nor is it fully understood.
In the interview, Gore indicated that he’s not done trying to smear those who don’t believe climate change is a real threat to the environment. He said that in order to win the conversation, climate alarmists have to compare skeptics to the racists who opposed civil rights for minorities.
“I think the most important part of it is winning the conversation. I remember as a boy when the conversation on civil rights was won in the South. I remember a time when one of my friends made a racist joke and another said, hey man, we don’t go for that anymore,” he said.
“The conversation on global warming has been stalled because a shrinking group of denialists fly into a rage when it’s mentioned. It’s like a family with an alcoholic father who flies into a rage every time a subject is mentioned and so everybody avoids the elephant in the room to keep the peace,” he added. “The deniers are being hit politically. They’re being subjected to ridicule, which stings. The polling is going back up in favor of doing something on this issue. The ability of the raging deniers to stop progress is waning every single day.”
Basically, Gore and alarmists can’t win on the merits, so they’re going to treat skeptics as though they’re crazy and out of touch. Mmmkay. Seems legit, especially since global warming has slowed.
There is little doubt that anthropogenic climate change exists. That’s not the issue. It’s how much we know and the real impact it has on the environment and weather patterns. Moreover, what are the economic consequences about “doing something” to deal with climate change when policies proposed to deal with the phenomenon will hurt economic growth?
The climate alarmists will say that the costs of doing nothing are greater than the costs associated with doing nothing. Of course, that has been, as noted, based on information that is false or misleading, at best; meaning that the status quo of climate alarmism will be preserved and politicians will continue their efforts to impose costly tax and regulatory burdens on Americans.