• Privacy Policy
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
Climate Change Dispatch
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • 97% – Myth of the Climate Change Consensus
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • 97% – Myth of the Climate Change Consensus
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us
No Result
View All Result
Climate Change Dispatch
No Result
View All Result

A Primer On The IPCC’s Implausible Climate Scenarios

by Roger Pielke Jr.
1 year ago
in News and Opinion
Reading Time: 4 mins read
A A
5

josh ipcc cartoonNext Monday the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change will release its so-called “Synthesis Report” which will integrate the findings of six different reports that it has released since 2014.

I have not participated in the IPCC nor have I seen the new report.

However, I have little doubt that one of the main issues that we will be discussing next week when the report is released will be the implausible climate scenarios that underpin much of the work of the IPCC over the past 9 years. [emphasis, links added]

Research I’ve been involved in — along with colleagues Matthew Burgess and Justin Ritchie — shows that the emissions scenarios that have guided the work of the IPCC and the broader climate research community are widely off the mark.

In short, they are far too extreme, both in what they project for today and especially into the future.

Our work is part of a growing consensus in the literature about the implausibility of extreme climate scenarios — a consensus so strong that it was acknowledged in the most recent IPCC assessment reports, even though it complicated their messages.

The ubiquity of out-of-date scenarios throughout recent IPCC reports and the underlying literature that is has assessed means that the IPCC Synthesis Report, summarizing its work since 2014, runs the risk of promoting out-of-date science.

If so, that would be a lot like driving down a highway looking in the rearview mirror. You can certainly do it, but it’s not a great idea.

I have written a lot in recent years about the out-of-date scenarios of the IPCC and I thought it would be useful to prepare this short primer for those wanting to better understand the issues or simply to be reminded of the key findings.

At the article’s end, I’ll make a couple of key papers available as PDFs for paid subscribers, for those wanting to take a really deep dive. You also find a couple of open-access papers linked below for all readers.

Comments and questions are welcomed. I’ll follow up next week after the IPCC Synthesis Report is out and appreciate your engagement as we explore this together.

What Did IPCC AR6 Working Group 1 Say About Extreme Scenarios in 2021?

A good place to start is with the most recent IPCC report on the physical science of climate change, with its conclusions heavily dependent on the choice of scenarios to emphasize.

The recent IPCC reports revealed a core tension — it acknowledged the low likelihood (its words) of the scenarios that it focuses the most attention on and, by extension, it ignores scenarios with a much greater likelihood.

That’s a recipe for confusion and misleading projections, not to mention doomism and hyperbole.

Why Do Implausible Scenarios Live On, Like Zombies?

This post is from 2020 and is the most-read post ever here at The Honest Broker. In it, I try to explain why it is that out-of-date scenarios, undeniably so, are so difficult to displace in climate research.

It is a serious problem that is just as bad in 2023 as it was in 2020. The title of this post is even more appropriate than I could have imagined.

The issues here have much more to do with how science operates (and sometimes doesn’t) rather than climate politics, but there is certainly a role for each.

What Does Our Latest Research Show?

Last summer, at the IIASA Scenarios Forum I presented the results of our most recent work (published in ERL and PNAS, both papers are open access, so have a look) on the plausibility of climate scenarios of the IPCC’s Fifth and Sixth assessment reports.

There is good news here. And that’s OK to say! However, you’d barely know it from the legacy media (though, to be fair, there has been some progress).

You can watch my full talk at the link here, it is less than 15 minutes.

What Would a Climate Researcher from 2005 Think About Your Research?

I am actually such a time traveler, having worked on the use and misuse of climate projections for almost three decades. It just has taken me three decades to get here.

Without a doubt, the researchers from that earlier era would be quite happy with what we’ve recently learned. I imagine in [this post] what they might say after exiting the time machine.

After the jump, PDFs of two papers of ours that together tell a more complete story of implausible scenarios and how climate research got off track. One is short and digestible, the other is a magnum opus.

  • Pielke, R., & Ritchie, J. (2021). How climate scenarios lost touch with reality. Issues in Science and Technology, 37(4), 74-83.
  • Pielke Jr, R., & Ritchie, J. (2021). Distorting the view of our climate future: The misuse and abuse of climate pathways and scenarios. Energy Research & Social Science, 72, 101890.

Read full post at The Honest Broker

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Truth
  • LinkedIn
  • Gettr
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Mastodon
  • Buffer
  • Telegram
  • Email
  • Copy Link
  • Share Using More Networks…
Share via
  • Facebook
  • Like
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn
  • Digg
  • Del
  • Tumblr
  • VKontakte
  • Print
  • Email
  • Reddit
  • Buffer
  • Love This
  • Weibo
  • Pocket
  • Xing
  • Odnoklassniki iconOdnoklassniki
  • WhatsApp
  • Meneame
  • Blogger
  • Amazon
  • Yahoo Mail
  • Gmail
  • AOL
  • Newsvine
  • HackerNews
  • Evernote
  • MySpace
  • Mail.ru
  • Viadeo
  • Line
  • Flipboard
  • Comments
  • Yummly
  • SMS
  • Viber
  • Telegram
  • Subscribe
  • Skype
  • Facebook Messenger
  • Kakao
  • LiveJournal
  • Yammer
  • Edgar
  • Fintel
  • Mix
  • Instapaper
  • Copy Link
  • Truth
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Gettr
  • Baidu
  • Mastodon

Join our list

Subscribe to our mailing list and get interesting stuff and updates to your email inbox.

Thank you for subscribing.

Something went wrong.

We respect your privacy and take protecting it seriously

Related

Next Post

Tucker Carlson: Climate Experts Want To Control You, Not Save The Earth

Comments 5

  1. Spurwing Plover says:
    1 year ago

    Time to just totally cut off all funding to the United Nations then moved them to Moscow

  2. Sonnyhill says:
    1 year ago

    Good news! The bad old news has been proven wrong. Where’s the mea culpa headlines? None to be found.
    The MSM continues to double down, under orders from the billionaire owners. Anything short of propaganda is blasphemy.

    • Charles Wardrop says:
      1 year ago

      What price these billionaires?
      Do they want to destroy Western nations?
      If so, why so?
      Could an insane vanity contribute to their motivation?

      • Sonnyhill says:
        1 year ago

        Could it be that the likes of Bezos and Gates are comfortable and don’t want to buck the Machiavellians at the WEF? In return for lip service, they get a free pass on their obvious hypocrisy. “It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to pass through the gates of Heaven” . In the eyes of the Left, these rich guys are already angels.

  3. Graham McDonald says:
    1 year ago

    Remember, the IPCC “Final Report” is written by politians, for politians.

    It’s a three step process. Papers published in peer-reviewed journals are selected by ‘climate experts’. The papers are then examined to see how well they agree. The ‘experts’ write their report. Now come politians from any UN member state who want to have a trip overseas.

    They read the ‘expert’s’ report. “This part says island nations may be sinking.” “Change it to, they are sinking.”

    And the experts go back to their report and make the change.

    The IPCC’s “Reports” are not written by scientists.

Stay Connected On Social Media

gab-logo

Donate Today

Beating back the alarmist narrative takes time and money. Please donate today to help!

Recent Posts

  • Media Ignorantly Blame Climate Change For Heat-Related Deaths During Hajj Pilgrimage
    Jun 28, 2024
    The deaths of more than 1,300 people at this year’s Hajj attributed to heat is tragic, but historically not uncommon. […]
  • UN secretary general antonio guterresThe UN Emperor Has No Science (Just Mangled Metaphors To Pitch Extreme Climate Alarmism)
    Jun 28, 2024
    History will record that the United Nations and its emperor as the greatest organizational perpetrators of junk science in modern times. […]
  • Fayette power plantSupreme Court Strikes Down EPA Rule Targeting Downwind Power Plant Pollution
    Jun 27, 2024
    The Supreme Court blocked an Environmental Protection Agency rule cracking down on power plant pollution. […]
  • protest climate justice riotClimate Lawfare: Using The Courts To Dictate And Enforce Green Energy Policies
    Jun 27, 2024
    Lawfare is becoming a key tactic of the climate cult because they can’t get their wish list enacted through the democratic process. […]
  • cattle cows livestockDenmark Rolls Out ‘Flatulence Tax’ For Livestock To Ostensibly Slash Methane Emissions
    Jun 27, 2024
    Starting in 2030, Danish livestock farmers will have to pay for the greenhouse gases their cows, sheep and pigs produce. […]
  • beach summer heatAn Expert’s Forecast Of Central Europe’s ‘Summer Of Hell’ Already Off-Track
    Jun 27, 2024
    A suspect biologist had predicted a 'summer of hell with almost complete certainty.' It hasn’t materialized yet. […]
  • harris eco adGreenwashing Kamala Harris: How The Veep Casts Herself As An Eco-Justice Crusader
    Jun 27, 2024
    Kamala Harris has long cast herself as a fearless pioneer of social and environmental justice. Her record shows something far different. […]
  • biden solar farmSolar Execs Who Gave Millions To Dems And Lobbied For Subsidies Are Swimming In Cash
    Jun 26, 2024
    Execs and investors in a solar company who donated heavily to Dems and lobbied for Biden’s big climate tax bill ended up as major winners when it passed. […]
  • power plant refineryWhat the Media Won’t Tell You About Fossil Fuels And The Green Energy Transition
    Jun 26, 2024
    Trillions of taxpayer dollars have been spent on a supposed 'green transition' that isn’t occurring at all. In fact, the opposite is happening. […]
  • jennifer granholmBiden DOE Farming Out Home Appliance Rules To Left-Wing Climate Activist Groups
    Jun 26, 2024
    Climate activist groups and far-left green groups helped craft the DOE's aggressive regulations targeting popular household appliances. […]

Get Instant Email Notifications

Enter your email address to receive notifications of new posts by email either instantly or daily. Check your Junk folder for any verification emails upon subscribing.

Submit a tip

Please enter your email, so we know you're human.

Books We Like

Have a suggestion? Let us know! We swap out books based on your input. We participate in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program. See here.

  • Privacy Policy
  • About Us
  • Contact Us

Portions © 2024 Climate Change Dispatch

Share via
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Mastodon
  • Buffer
  • Telegram
  • Email
  • Copy Link
  • Share Using More Networks…
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • 97% – Myth of the Climate Change Consensus
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us

© 2024 Climate Change Dispatch