The IPCC gets better. Climate alarmists freak-out!

Joe Romm blows his top.The IPCC must be
doing something right.Summary: The IPCC is the only organization of its kind today, and so the best that we have to deal with the critical problem of climate change. The leaked draft of the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) shows that they’re improving in response to criticism. Here we look at a prominent supporters’ reaction (not what you might expect), some areas needing more work, and other examples of change in the climate wars.

Contents

1. About the IPCC
2. The Draft AR5
3. Joe Romm blows his top
4. Suggestions for the future
5. For More Information

(1) About the IPCC

The IPCC has always had difficulty managing its dual mission: report the state of climate science and advocate for public policy action to mitigate effects of rising CO2. One of their best critics, Monckton of Brenchley, describes the results in the opening to his review of AR5:

The IPCC’s credibility has already been damaged by its premature adoption and subsequent hasty abandonment of the now-discredited “hockey-stick” graph as its logo; by its rewriting its Second Assessment Report after submission of the scientists’ final draft, to state the opposite of their finding that no discernible human influence on climate is detectable; by its declaration that all Himalayan ice would be gone in 25 years {see this summary}; and by its use of a dishonest statistical technique in 2007 falsely to suggest that the rate of global warming is accelerating.

Even more telling are critics showing systematic misstating by IPCC authors of the climate science literature (eg, chapter lead authors often showcasing their own work and ignoring their critics). While just business as usual in academic science, the IPCC should not tolerable this when writing the foundation for high-stakes and high-cost public policy. It shows a lack of internal controls at the IPCC, and weakens their credibility.

For more about the IPCC:

• For an eye-opening look inside the IPCC see Donna Laframboise’s The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the World’s Top Climate Expert. See the excerpts at the Financial Post: part one, part two.
• Lost voices in the climate science debate
• “Climate Change: what do we know about the IPCC?”
• About the Second Assessment Report: Hidden history about Madrid 1995: a look at the conference that changed the world

…snip…

(3) Joe Romm blows his top

Another way to judge the IPCC is by looking at the reactions of “activists” (ie, propagandists), cheerleaders for drastic public policy action. Such as Joe Romm: “Leaked IPCC Draft Report: Recent Warming Is Manmade, Cloud Feedback Is Positive, Inaction Is Suicidal“, ThinkProgress, 16 December 2012 — Excerpt:

That multiply-hedged morass is pretty much the mildest statement that could possibly be made. … For me, the leaked draft, which has not yet been peer reviewed — and thus still has time to be watered down yet more – underscores how pointless the IPCC has become. Like the 4th assessment before it, this ultra-conservative and instantly obsolete report ignores the latest science … And like the AR4, the AR5 scenarios low-ball future impacts … Once again, the authors twist themselves in pretzels to over-hedge every statement with their precise (but inaccurate!) terminology.

… But all AR5 can muster up for the probability of future “increases in frequency and/or intensity of drought” is “Likely [>; 66% probability] in some regions” — which I guess means the IPCC thinks there is 1 in 3 chance it won’t happen anywhere! How could that be with the kind of warming we will see in the RCP8.5 scenario, which, it must be added is really just business as usual emissions and far from the worst-case? This failure to warn the public and policymakers echoes the great failing of their 2011 extreme weather report.

After years of chiding skeptics for daring to question the IPCC’s work, suddenly Romm discovers that he — not the IPCC — is the ur-source of climate information. He displays one of the great rules of alarmist climate propaganda: Scientists and the IPCC are authorities, unless they disagree with alarmists. Then they’re cranks. Here’s my favorite example: High school science facts prove global warming! Skeptical scientists humiliated by this revelation!.

Read rest…