Pielke Jr.: The IPCC goes all-in with implausible scenarios and political activism

Posted: March 3, 2022 by oldbrew in alarmism, climate, Critique, Emissions, IPCC, Politics, predictions, propaganda

Credit: BBC

Using far-fetched worst-case scenarios, the IPCC has become a cheerleader for emissions reductions. Propaganda has overtaken real science in a big way.
– – –
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is an important organization with a primary purpose to assess the scientific literature on climate in order to inform policy, says Roger Pielke Jr. @ Climate Change Dispatch.

The IPCC spans the physical sciences, impacts, adaptation and vulnerability, and economics.

I have often stated that the IPCC is so important that if it did not exist we’d need to invent it because the challenge of climate change presents significant risks.

As a consequence, both mitigation and adaptation responses must be a priority. Rigorous scientific assessments are thus needed to inform policymaking.

Earlier this week, the IPCC’s Working Group 2 (WG2) report was released on impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability — Working Group 1 on the physical sciences was released last year and Working Group 3 on economics will come later this year.

Regrettably, the IPCC WG2 has strayed far from its purpose to assess and evaluate the scientific literature, and has positioned itself much more as a cheerleader for emissions reductions and produced a report that supports such advocacy.

The IPCC exhorts: “impacts will continue to increase if drastic cuts in greenhouse gas emissions are further delayed – affecting the lives of today’s children tomorrow and those of their children much more than ours … Any further delay in concerted global action will miss a brief and rapidly closing window to secure a liveable future.”

The focus on emissions reductions is a major new orientation for WG2, which previously was focused exclusively on impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability.

The new focus on mitigation is explicit, with the IPCC WG2 noting (1-31) that its focus “expands significantly from previous reports” and now includes “the benefits of climate change mitigation and emissions reductions.”

This new emphasis on mitigation colors the entire report, which in places reads as if adaptation is secondary to mitigation or even impossible.

The IPCC oddly presents non-sequiturs tethering adaptation to mitigation: “Successful adaptation requires urgent, more ambitious and accelerated action and, at the same time, rapid and deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.”

To illustrate with just one example (of many): The report concludes (TS-31) with high confidence that “Flood risks and societal damages are projected to increase with every increment of global warming.” This is simply not true.

And by “not true”, I mean that it is not an accurate representation of the literature that WG2 cites to justify this claim.

It is also empirically false, as vulnerability to floods has dramatically decreased even as the planet has warmed. However, such a claim is useful in advocating for mitigation actions.

Allow me to go into the weeds just briefly (on Twitter I document many such journeys).

Continued here.

  1. oldbrew says:

    Pielke Jr. gives examples of IPCC’s tomfoolery and says:

    Implausibility built on implausibility offers no practical insight as to the role of adaptation in reducing vulnerabilities and increasing resilience. We might expect this sort of thing from a passionate advocacy group spinning science for theatrical effect, but not the IPCC.

    They’re looking more and more desperate as the climate keeps failing to deliver what their models say it should. Using RCP8.5 is a no-no for being taken seriously.

  2. tallbloke says:

  3. oldbrew says:

    John Kerry said he was concerned about the “massive emissions consequences to the war, but equally important, you’re going to lose people’s focus.”
    – – –
    How sad. Fewer emissions from Kerry’s pointless private jet trips would be a fine thing.

  4. Phil Salmon says:

    OT but interesting – new em research suggests that solar surface magnetic loops might be optical illusions. The surface may not have loops, only a complex convoluted “wrinkled” surface presenting the appearance of loops in 2D projection view.


    Actual paper:


  5. Phoenix44 says:

    I think its fair to say that without extremely authoritarian governments forcing us to stop driving, flying and heating, there simply will not be drastic cuts in emissions their fantasy “window”. Even the dimmest politicians are now becoming aware of the enormous damage that would cause to societies and economies. Its also becoming obvious that India and China are simply not going to follow the West down this path – they have not dragged themselves out of poverty just to plunge themselves back down again. Nor will the West’s money help – it will be worthless if we are not producing anything.

    Interesting times.

  6. […] Pielke Jr.: The IPCC goes all-in with implausible scenarios and political activism […]

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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