Some IPCC Problems

[Jack Hays]

Perhaps the IPCC should be telling us to pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!

[h=2]The 2013 IPCC AR5 Report: Facts -vs- Fictions[/h] Posted on October 3, 2013 by Guest Blogger
Guest essay by Dr. Don J. Easterbrook, Professor of Geology, Western Washington University
Mark Twain popularized the saying “There are liars, damn liars, and statisticians.” After reading the recently-released [IPCC AR5] report, we can now add, ‘there are liars, damn liars, and IPCC.” When compared to the also recently published NIPCC (Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change) 1000[SUP]+[/SUP]-page volume of data on climate change with thousands of peer-reviewed references, the inescapable conclusion is that the IPCC report must be considered the grossest misrepresentation of data ever published. As MIT climate scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen stated, “The latest IPCC report has truly sunk to the level of hilarious incoherence—it is quite amazing to see the contortions the IPCC has to go through in order to keep the international climate agenda going.”
From the IPCC 2013 Report

After all these years, IPCC still doesn’t get it—we’ve been thawing out from the Little Ice Age for several hundred years but still are not yet back to pre-Little Ice Age temperatures that prevailed for 90% of the past 10,000 years. Warming and cooling has been going on for millions of years, long before CO[SUB]2[/SUB] could have had anything to do with it, so warming in itself certainly doesn’t prove that it was caused by CO[SUB]2[/SUB].
Continue reading →:mrgreen:

 

[flogger]

This is just early days yet and stuff like this is being discovered already ! Given what is actually happening in the real world the IPCC has now to resort to the tactic that if you cant blind them with science try and baffle them with BS :roll:

 

[Deuce]

So, a statement from the IPCC says that the climate has definitely been warming. You then say that the climate has definitely been warming. But the IPCC has a problem here because


edit: and HOLY ****ING ****. Did Watts just cherry-pick a single goddamned days months (edit: i reed gud) temperature and compare it to annual and 5-year average temperatures in order to declare there hadn't been .5C warming since 1980?
:lamo

I mean holy ****. You people bought this!?

 

[Diogenes]

This is just early days yet and stuff like this is being discovered already ! Given what is actually happening in the real world the IPCC has now to resort to the tactic that if you cant blind them with science try and baffle them with BS :roll:

Exactly.

 

[Deuce]

IPCC shows a decadal warming of 0.6°C (1°F) since 1980 but the temperature over the past decade has actually cooled, not warmed.

These are not contradictory what the **** is Watts retarded?

 

[EdwinWillers]

A man took his daughter for a ride on a ferris wheel. As it started up, she started screaming "Daddy! We're going higher and higher!!!" He calmly told her to shut her eyes for a few moments during which time the ride reached its apex and started to descend. She opened her eyes in relief "Daddy, we're going down!" But then the ride reached its low point and started to ascend once again whereupon the little girl started screaming again...

I think maybe it's time the IPCCers and AGW alarmists started to realize how "climate change" really works and recognize where we're at on this particular portion of the ride.

...that or please, just close your eyes for awhile. It'll all be good and we'll be on the downside soon.

 

[Deuce]

A man took his daughter for a ride on a ferris wheel. As it started up, she started screaming "Daddy! We're going higher and higher!!!" He calmly told her to shut her eyes for a few moments during which time the ride reached its apex and started to descend. She opened her eyes in relief "Daddy, we're going down!" But then the ride reached its low point and started to ascend once again whereupon the little girl started screaming again...

I think maybe it's time the IPCCers and AGW alarmists started to realize how "climate change" really works and recognize where we're at on this particular portion of the ride.

...that or please, just close your eyes for awhile. It'll all be good and we'll be on the downside soon.

Which are you suggesting:

1) The IPCC/AGW proponents are not aware that climate has changed previously without our influence
2) That the fact that natural climate change exists makes human influence impossible
3) Other (please specify)

 

[Jack Hays]

So, a statement from the IPCC says that the climate has definitely been warming. You then say that the climate has definitely been warming. But the IPCC has a problem here because


edit: and HOLY ****ING ****. Did Watts just cherry-pick a single goddamned days months (edit: i reed gud) temperature and compare it to annual and 5-year average temperatures in order to declare there hadn't been .5C warming since 1980?
:lamo

I mean holy ****. You people bought this!?

Well, no. That's not what Professor Easterbrook did, and you would have noticed that if you weren't wearing your warmist blinders.eace

 

[Deuce]

Well, no. That's not what Professor Easterbrook did, and you would have noticed that if you weren't wearing your warmist blinders.eace

Their misrepresentation of data is ridiculous. In Fig. 1, the IPCC report purports to show warming of 0.5°C (0.9°F) since 1980, yet surface temperature measurements indicate no warming over the past 17 years (Fig. 2) and satellite temperature data shows the August 13 temperature only 0.12°C (0.21°F) above the 1908 temperature (Spencer, 2013). IPCC shows a decadal warming of 0.6°C (1°F) since 1980 but the temperature over the past decade has actually cooled, not warmed.

Then explain, oh unbiased one.

You are correct that it wasn't Watts, though. Didn't read the author part

 

[Jack Hays]

Then explain, oh unbiased one.

You are correct that it wasn't Watts, though. Didn't read the author part

This will do for a start. It's the real point.

There just isn’t any nice way to say this—it’s is an outright lie. A vast published literature exists showing that recent warming is not only not unusual, but more intense warming has occurred many times in the past centuries and millennia. As a reviewer of the IPCC report, I called this to their attention, so they cannot have been unaware of it. For example, more than 20 periods of warming in the past five centuries can be found in the Greenland GISP2 ice core (Fig. 3) (Easterbrook, 2011), the Medieval and Roman Warm Periods were warmer than recent warming (Fig. 4), and about 90% of the past 10,000 years were warmer than present (Fig. 5).

Figure. 3. More than 20 periods of warming in the past 500 years. (Greenland GISP2 ice core, Easterbrook, 2011)eace

 

[Deuce]

This doesn't address the quote I gave you. I bolded the text that prompted my statement.

 

[Jack Hays]

This doesn't address the quote I gave you. I bolded the text that prompted my statement.

It's an ancillary point.

 

[EdwinWillers]

Which are you suggesting:

1) The IPCC/AGW proponents are not aware that climate has changed previously without our influence
2) That the fact that natural climate change exists makes human influence impossible
3) Other (please specify)

It's simple. Global temperature is cyclical, even sinusoidal, like the movement of that little girl. Where one is at any given point on the curve will determine for some, as for that little girl, whether they scream or not.

For others, we just recognize it's a ride.

 

[sangha]

This will do for a start. It's the real point.

There just isn’t any nice way to say this—it’s is an outright lie. A vast published literature exists showing that recent warming is not only not unusual, but more intense warming has occurred many times in the past centuries and millennia. As a reviewer of the IPCC report, I called this to their attention, so they cannot have been unaware of it. For example, more than 20 periods of warming in the past five centuries can be found in the Greenland GISP2 ice core (Fig. 3) (Easterbrook, 2011), the Medieval and Roman Warm Periods were warmer than recent warming (Fig. 4), and about 90% of the past 10,000 years were warmer than present (Fig. 5).

Figure. 3. More than 20 periods of warming in the past 500 years. (Greenland GISP2 ice core, Easterbrook, 2011)eace

Graph cuts off at 1960 :lamo

 

[flogger]

Graph cuts off at 1960 :lamo

This one doesnt (Kobashi 2011 GISP2)

 

[sangha]

This one doesnt (Kobashi 2011 GISP2)

View attachment 67154576

It shows a rise in temperatures that seems to be both longer and more rapid that any of the others.

 

[flogger]

It shows a rise in temperatures that seems to be both longer and more rapid that any of the others.

Eh ? What graph are you looking at ! It shows today as quite unremarkable . More here this time from both poles showing the same

Ice Cores

 

[sangha]

Eh ? What graph are you looking at !

The one you posted. Though it's not consistently headed up, it clearly shows a trend upwards in the area that is shaded red. Moreover, the rise is sharper than anywhere else in the graph (see red line)

 

[flogger]

The one you posted. Though it's not consistently headed up, it clearly shows a trend upwards in the area that is shaded red. Moreover, the rise is sharper than anywhere else in the graph (see red line)

Tell me you actually noticed it was considerably lower than other peaks sometimes by nearly 3 C ! To most this would be significant ! Todays modern phase has plateaued for some time now too

 

[sangha]

Tell me you actually noticed it was considerably lower than other peaks sometimes by nearly 3 C ! To most this would be significant ! Todays modern phase has plateaued for some time now too

Yes, I noticed.

So what?

 

[flogger]

Yes, I noticed.

So what?

You win I give up :shock: :bolt

 

[sangha]

You win I give up :shock: :bolt

I accept your surrender!

After all, I can understand why you wouldn't want to make the inane argument that because temps were once higher, that means temps now couldn't go just as high or even higher.

 

[flogger]

I accept your surrender!

After all, I can understand why you wouldn't want to make the inane argument that because temps were once higher, that means temps now couldn't go just as high or even higher.

Its simpler than that . You are clearly too far gone to be worth wasting any more time on :roll:

 

[sangha]

Its simpler than that . You are clearly too far gone to be worth wasting any more time on :roll:

No need for you to surrender a second time.

 

[EdwinWillers]

This one doesnt (Kobashi 2011 GISP2)

View attachment 67154576

The one you posted. Though it's not consistently headed up, it clearly shows a trend upwards in the area that is shaded red. Moreover, the rise is sharper than anywhere else in the graph (see red line)

Actually, what you're looking at is a graph that shows that earth's temperature is cyclical. The "trend" you're seeing is for a brief period in time that is no different than for similar periods in time in the past. In other words, it shows that what we're experiencing, we've experienced numerous times before, and will continue to experience in the future. There is precisely NOTHING that suggests in that graph the remotest need for alarm. It's typical; it's normal. Moreover, it shows that for the past thousand years or so our temperature has been TRENDING downward.

The myopic tendency to view "trends" that are but snapshots in time is what is the real problem here. It is a very basic error many make who do not understand cyclical processes - viewing the slope of a tangent line at a peculiar moment in time and making the absurd assumption that that slope "means" something contrary to the data taken as a whole.