Roger Pielke Jr: The unstoppable momentum of outdated science 

Posted: December 3, 2020 by oldbrew in climate, Critique, research

Earth and climate – an ongoing controversy

As long as the ‘implausible scenarios’ cited here are allowed past peer review, the problems described below aren’t going to go away. Climate exaggeration seems to be something of a sport these days.
– –
Much of climate research is focused on implausible scenarios of the future, but implementing a course correction will be difficult, reports The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).

A 2015 literature review found almost 900 peer-reviewed studies published on breast cancer using a cell line derived from a breast cancer patient in Texas in 1976.

But in 2007 it was confirmed that the cell line that had long been the focus of this research was actually not a breast cancer line, but was instead a skin cancer line. Whoops.

Even worse, from 2008 to 2014 — after the mistaken cell line was conclusively identified — the review identified 247 peer-reviewed articles putatively on breast cancer that were published using the misidentified skin cancer cell line.

A cursory search of Google Scholar indicates that studies continue to be published in 2020 mistakenly using the skin cell line in breast cancer research.

The lesson from this experience is that science has momentum, and that momentum can be hard to change, even when obvious and significant flaws are identified. This is particularly the case when the flaws exist in databases that underlie research across an entire discipline.

In 2020, climate research finds itself in a similar situation to that of breast cancer research in 2007.

Evidence indicates the scenarios of the future to 2100 that are at the focus of much of climate research have already diverged from the real world and thus offer a poor basis for projecting policy-relevant variables like economic growth and carbon dioxide emissions. A course-correction is needed.

In a new paper of ours just out in Environmental Research Letters we perform the most rigorous evaluation to date of how key variables in climate scenarios compare with data from the real world (specifically, we look at population, economic growth, energy intensity of economic growth and carbon intensity of energy consumption). We also look at how these variables might evolve in the near-term to 2040.

We find that the most commonly-used scenarios in climate research have already diverged significantly from the real world, and that divergence is going to only get larger in coming decades.

Continued here.

  1. stpaulchuck says:

    you seem to be missing the point. Out here where we live this has nothing to do with science. This is ALL about politics and one more power grab by those who should NEVER be allowed any. AGW is merely another vehicle to accomplish that.

    It’s been shown over and over again with papers by hundreds of people with chops in the fields that can determine the viability of various theories around climate and what changes it that AGW is a total scam. If you honestly note the error bars on the temperature data and the analogous temperature data from tree rings, etc., you easily find that human contributions fall within the noise band and are therefor indistinguishable from noise. But that will NOT deter the pols from using and abusing “facts” from paid-off “scientists” to support their power grabs.

    Having said that, I do applaud you and all the others who work tirelessly to keep science honest.
    “Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts” – Richard Feynman

  2. Gary Richard Conway says:

    The problem stems from the fact that scientists tie their careers to their research studies, if they admit that their published results may have been wrong their chance of gaining a valuable research grant falls to almost zero, So poopoo any research that doesn’t uphold theirs let future generations work out the problems they create, they still have a lucrative life style,

  3. Paul Vaughan says:

    With absolute certainly we have known for years that a “course correction” STRICTLY CANNOT be achieved with “science”.

    Extremely dangerous: The bigger problem is “they will make other trouble” if you try to correct them.

    This is NOT a left-right problem. It’s rich people BOTH LEFT AND RIGHT going savage on poorer people.

    Sensible people: Ask the pope to wake up. Remember Galileo and Jesus Christ.

  4. oldbrew says:

    The crutch of reliance on rubbish AGW theory has to be kicked away to have any chance of getting the majority to understand what’s really going on.

    No offence intended to genuine users of crutches, of course.

  5. Paul Vaughan says:

    OB: Less than 1% of the population understands what’s really going on. Aiming for a majority to understand is totally and completely unrealistic …unless of course the censorship devices were to suddenly.

  6. Coeur de Lion says:

    Read RP’s synopsis which deals with real-world versus modelled CO2 concentrations. Excellent. I imagine real world versus models on whether CO2 actually affects the weather ( pun) to any measurable extent comes separately.

  7. oldbrew says:

    The public has been told their air is full of ghastly CO2 that must be reduced by a monumental effort over decades.

    Of course this is garbage, as the 0.04% of CO2 – much of which is natural – in the atmosphere shows. But the media sweeps all that under the carpet, as we know.

  8. cognog2 says:

    This scam CAGW MEME has been behaving in like manner to a VIRUS and has now reached pandemic proportions. A vaccine is desperately needed. There are antidotes but the Meme itself goes to great lengths to ensure that they get severely suppressed in the mainstream media.

    This scam has much to answer for and will leave a trail of misery in its wake for years to come.

    IMO the root cause of this stems from the remit given to the IPCC upon its inauguration which required it to specifically determine the risks involved in anthropological CO2 emissions.
    It is not surprising therefore that risks were duly found and exacerbated to potentially catastrophic levels; as otherwise the IPCC would have been disbanded. Being a political institution the ‘How’s’ and ‘Why’s’ do not need too much imagination to determine.

  9. oldbrew says:

    Link to the study: IPCC baseline scenarios have over-projected CO2 emissions and economic growth

    Quote: It is unsurprising that scenarios used by the IPCC—many developed over a decade ago—are diverging from the real world. They should be updated more regularly.
    – – –
    Less absurd scenarios would still be absurd.

  10. oldbrew says:

    2020 Atlantic hurricane season ranked 15th of 121 years in normalized losses

    Note via PNAS: “The loss record must be ‘normalized’ in order to make past events comparable to the present. Pielke and Landsea (13) pioneered the use of ‘loss normalization’ on hurricane damage. They found that the trend in damage disappears after normalization and concluded that the apparent rising losses were entirely due to changes in society.”

  11. oldbrew says:

    Claims of climate science ‘experts’ getting outdated even faster than RP thinks?

    Climate Activists Claim Leaves Falling Earlier, Denying Their Previous Claims
    By James Taylor – November 29, 2020

    CNN published an article typical of what the corporate media are publishing this weekend. The CNN article is titled, “Trees are losing their leaves earlier because of climate change.” Reporting on a speculative newly published study in the journal Science, the CNN story claims, “Increases in spring and summer productivity that come as a result of elevated carbon dioxide, temperature and light levels actually drive trees to lose their leaves earlier, the experts found.”

    Just last year, however, Yale Climate Connections published an article claiming, “As temperatures warm, the fall season has been delayed.” The article added, “As the climate has warmed during the past few decades, the onset of fall colors across much of the Northern Hemisphere has been delayed. In the eastern United States, fall foliage arrives an average of two weeks late compared to the 1980s and 1990s….”

    So, which is it?
    – – –

  12. Paul Vaughan says:

    stpaulchuck says:
    “you seem to be missing the point […] This is ALL about politics […]”


    AC/DC: “WHO made WHO?” Quest UN raised: WHO’s at UN work “kin” (or king) for WHO?

    Democracy has transformed into a lion gnashing at the throat of freedom.

    The response: They want to take decades patiently debating “the science” even though no valid point has ever been acknowledged — effectively “allies” serving the lion.

    Broad agreement on what’s happening will never occur. The critical moment has arrived. We don’t even have 1%. Still a decision must be taken. What human agency remains that can save freedom? There’s only 1.

    May God bless you stpaulchuck.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s