Why does the NIPCC matter?
Professor Bob Carter
Institute of Public Affairs, Melbourne
International Climate Science Coalition
Dali’esque science
Heartland ICCC-9
Mandalay Bay
Las Vegas
July 9th, 2014
Why is this?
Salvador Dali – 1931 - The Persistence of Memory - MoMA
Four things to know about the IPCC
1. A RESTRICTED BRIEF
The Framework Convention on
Climate Change (1994, Article
1.2) refers to:
“A change of climate which
is attributed directly or
indirectly to human activity
that alters the composition
of the global atmosphere
and which is in addition to
natural climate variability
observed over comparable
time periods”.
2. A POLITICAL BODY
‘Rajendra Pachauri, in The Guardian, Sept.
20, 2013
“We are an intergovernmental body
and we do what the governments of
the world want us to do.”
“If the governments decide we should
do things differently and come up with
a vastly different set of products we
would be at their beck and call.”
Four things to know about the IPCC
3. INCREASING ALARMISM
IPCC Statements on Global Warming, 1990-2013
The observed [20th century temperature] increase could be largely due to …. natural variability.
IPCC, 1st AR, 1990
The balance of the evidence suggests a discernible human influence on climate.
IPCC, 2nd AR, 1996
There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming over the last 50 years is
attributable to human activities.
IPCC, 3rd AR, 2001
Most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperature since the mid-20th century is
very likely [>90% probable*] due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas
concentrations.
IPCC, 4th AR, 2007
It is extremely likely [>95% probable*] that human activities have caused more than half of the
observed increase in global average surface temperature since the 1950s.
4. HOCUS POCUS SCIENCE
IPCC, 5th AR draft, 2012
HOCUS POCUS SCIENCE
The IPCC redefines probability theory
1. A restricted brief
3. Increasingly alarmist
2. A political body
4. Hocus pocus science
Four things to know about the NIPCC
•
•
•
•
NIPCC advisory scientists are fully independent
and beholden to nobody; many, being retired, are
also highly experienced and knowledgable.
NIPCC activities are funded by untied family foundation
donations; no financial conflict of interest exists.
NIPCC summarizes peer-reviewed scientific
literature about climate change “in the round”;
no a priori assumptions are made about the
importance of particular causatory agents.
NIPCC acts as a Red Team that undertakes due
diligence on the conclusions and recommendations
of the IPCC Green Team.
RICHARD FEYNMAN on WHAT IS SCIENCE?
Dr. Richard Feynman, “The Character of Natural Law”, The MIT Press, 1965, p. 156.
"In general,
we look
for a new
by key
the
“It’s
that simple
statement
thatlaw
is the
following
to
science.process.
ItFirst,
doeswe
notguess
makeit.
any[HYPOTHESIS]
difference how
beautiful your guess is.
Then we compute the consequences
ofdoes
the guess
to see
what
would be
It
not make
any
difference
how
implied
if this
wethe
guessed
smart
you
are,law
whothat
made
guess,isor
right. his name is …. “
what
Then we compare the result of the
“If it disagrees
with
experiment
computation
to nature,
with
experiment
or [or
experience,
compare
with
observation]
ititisdirectly
wrong."
observation to see if it works.
Which is why the IPCC’s Dali’esque hypothesis of DAGW is wrong; we need a different paradigm – ANDREW WYETH
Christina is most surely a lead member of the climate RED TEAM
Andrew Wyeth – Christina’s World – 1948 - MoMA
The role of hypothesis testing in science
The hypothesis implicit in all IPCC writings, though
rarely explicitly stated, is:
That dangerous global warming is resulting, or will
result, from human-related greenhouse gas
emissions.
GREEN TEAM - IPCC toils unceasingly
to discover or provide evidence that
validates its hypothesis.
The null hypothesis is:
That currently observed changes in global climate,
and in the physical and biological environment,
result from natural variability.
RED TEAM - NIPCC examines all evidence to
try to invalidate the null hypothesis.
Andrew Wyeth – Christina’s World - 1948
Feynman again – “the first principle is not to fool yourself – and you are the easiest person to fool”
And the problem with the IPCC is that they have not only fooled themselves, but many influential people around the world as well
GUARDIAN
ANGELS
Cristo Redentor
Paul Landowski & Heitor da
Silva Costa - 1931
Rio de Janiero
40 m high
Angel of the North
Antony Gormley - 1998
Gateshead, England
54 x 20 m
There is another guardian angel that few have observed,
We humans
a strange
slecies
strive for
but prone to emotionalism – don’t have to be religious to feel the power of Brazil’s famouns statue …..
Though
manyare
have
seen the
site at– which
it isimpartiality,
erected
The 2000 Millennium Sculptures – Clemens Jöckle Woytek
Mt. Hakepa, Pitt Island, Chatham Islands, NZ
NIPCC – The guardian of integrity in climate science
Team Red
ASTRONOMER
Questing
“They give thought to the
creation of heaven and
earth”
PHILOSOPHER
Wisdom
Integrity
NEWBORN
New ideas
Future hope
MASAI WARRIOR
Dignity
Strength
Ibn Rushd Averroes, 12th C
Millennium TV show in 2000 (ii) 10,000 km to S. America – SIZE ISN’T EVERYTHING
The Mediaeval Warm Period
SIX IMPORTANT
NIPCC CONCLUSIONS
•
•
•
•
•
•
The assumption that prior to the industrial
revolution the earth had a “more stable”
climate is simply wrong.
Climate has always changed, and it always will. There is
nothing unusual about the modern magnitudes or rates of
change of temperature, ice volume, sea-level or extreme
weather events.
The most likely medium term threat may be of damaging cooling.
Atmospheric CO2 is neither a pollutant, nor the primary forcing
agent for temperature change; rather, CO2 is an overall benefice
for humankind.
Attempting to “stop climate change” is an
expensive act of utter futility.
The only sensible thing to do about climate
change is to adapt to it – both benign
warmings and the more dangerous coolings
(cf. earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, storms).
The Little Ice Age
The Mediaeval Warm Period
SIX IMPORTANT
NIPCC CONCLUSIONS
•
•
•
•
•
•
The assumption that prior to the industrial
revolution the earth had a “more stable”
climate is simply wrong.
Climate has always changed, and it always will. There is
nothing unusual about the modern magnitudes or rates of
change of temperature, ice volume, sea-level or extreme
weather events.
The most likely medium term threat may be of damaging cooling.
Atmospheric CO2 is neither a pollutant, nor the primary forcing
agent for temperature change; rather, CO2 is an overall benefice
for humankind.
Attempting to “stop climate change” is an
expensive act of utter futility.
The only sensible thing to do about climate
change is to adapt to it – both benign
warmings and the more dangerous coolings
(cf. earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, storms).
The Little Ice Age
NIPCC primary conclusions
Climate alarmism now in free-fall:
Why NIPCC matters
“The best and most comprehensive source of
alternative scientific views are Heartland
Institute’s NIPCC volumes.”
”Any speaker, any authority, any journalist or
bureaucrat asserting the catastrophic danger
of supposed man-caused global warming
needs to be asked for their response to
[NIPCC report] Climate Change Reconsidered.
If they have none, then they are not qualified
to address the subject.”
Romney's Pending Sellout on Global Warming
Peter Ferrara, American Spectator, 3.7.12
http://www.nipccreport.org/reports/reports.html
CONTEXT 1 – Is late 20th C temperature unusual?
The last 6 million years – ODP Sites, Central Pacific Ocean
Myth 1: Today’s temperature is unusually warm
Myth 2: Before the industrial revolution, climate was “stable”
Myth 3: Biodiversity crisis if T goes up 2 deg. C
ICEHOUSE
In surface waters
WARM
equivalent to
~100 C
at high
latitudes
Representing
200,000
climate data points
Diagram courtesy Alan Mix, Oregon State University
COLD
CONTEXT 2 - The late 20th century warming; and CO2
HOLOCENE
CLIMATIC
OPTIMUM
After Professor Ole Humlum, http://www.climate4you.com/
WHY SO LITTLE CORRELATION?
WHY SO LITTLE CORRELATION?
Because above about 150 ppm, climate sensitivity to
incremental increases in CO2 is very low. Such increases
therefore cause very little further warming.
So what sensitivity is assumed by the computer models then?
CONTEXT 3 – CO2 AND ALL THAT JAZZ
CO2 levels through time
280 ppm (or even 390
or 560 ppm) indicates
CO2 starvation
compared with the
geological past
Myth 4 – Atmospheric CO2 is at unusually high levels today
Myth 5 – More CO2 will cause dangerous warming
CONTEXT 3 – CO2 AND ALL THAT JAZZ
CO2 levels through time
The greening (CO2 fertilization) of the planet, 1982-2010
Randall J. Donohue, R.J., McVicar, T.R., Roderick, M.L. & Farquhar, G.D.
CSIRO Land and Water, Canberra, Australia
CO2 fertilisation has increased maximum foliage cover across the globe's warm, arid environments
A new study of arid regions around the globe finds that a CO2 “fertilization effect” has caused a
gradual greening from 1982 to 2010.
The team’s model predicted that foliage would increase by some 5 to 10% given the 14% increase in
atmospheric CO2 concentration during the study period. The satellite data agreed, showing an 11
percent increase in foliage after adjusting the data for precipitation.
CONTEXT 4 – Computer GCMs
EPIC FAIL: 73 Climate Models vs.
Observations for Tropical Tropospheric
Temperature
June 4th, 2013 by Roy W. Spencer
Myth 6 – That computer models are predictive tools
The climate models often get criticised - and
it is a valid criticism - that there is a lot of
physics that(after
we may
not even have in the
Roy Spencer)
models, and that which we do have in may
be inaccurate.
Hansen13-May16-UKParliamentQA.pdf
Walsh, K. et al. 2002
CSIRO Atmospheric Research
----------------------------------------------------------------------Important Disclaimer
This report relates to climate change scenarios based on
computer modelling. Models involve simplifications of the real
processes that are not fully understood.
Accordingly, no responsibility will be accepted by CSIRO or the
QLD government for the accuracy of forecasts or predictions
inferred from this report or for any person's interpretations,
deductions, conclusions or actions in reliance on this report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------On the back of the title page, in bold.
"Climate Change in Queensland Under Enhanced Greenhouse Conditions"
Final Report 1997-2002, 84 pp.
HOW NOW for policy?
NEXT – scientific technique
CONTEXT 5 – the scope of the “problem”
Myth 7 – That cutting western CO2 emissions will make any
measurable difference to future temperatures