Monday, April 07, 2008

Prof Bob Carter fisks IPCC

Prof Carter and eminent climate scientist from James Cook University, Queensland has written that the alarmists at the IPCC are finally on the run. And not before time I say.

Prof Carter refers to to key events:

The first is a letter to the Secretary General of the United Nations, which was released at the UN’s Bali conference last December, supported by the signatures of 103 eminent professional persons.

The second is the Manhatten Declaration on Climate Change, the release of which coincided with the launch of the International Climate Science Coalition at a major climate rationalist conference in New York in early March.
The IPCC’s complex computer models are programmed to produce the desired result - it is therefore not surprising that they uniformly predict warming since 1990. Meanwhile, the real-world global average temperature has stubbornly refused to obey this stricture. As I have blogged regularly. There has been a "stubborn" resistance to warming since 1998 and indeed we may now be experiencing a global cooling phase.

However there is not let or hindrance to the global warn=ming band wagons by the camp followers.

Scientists who initially supported the notion of anthropogenic warming have now learnt political doublwe aspeak...

witness again Professor Carter's report:
That there is a mismatch between model prediction and 2007 climate reality is again unsurprising. For as IPCC senior scientist Kevin Trenberth noted recently: ". . . there are no (climate) predictions by IPCC at all. And there never have been"; instead there are only "what if" projections of future climate that correspond to certain emissions scenarios. Trenberth continues, "None of the models used by IPCC is initialized to the observed state and none of the climate states in the models corresponds even remotely to the current observed climate”.
Note - IPCC Scientist Kevin Trenberth is backing away fast from IPCC having previously made "predictions" - saying they only ever made projections based on scenarios. Well that may be true - semantic drivel that it is. If so, their crime (and it is a biggie) has been to stand aside watching the political operators (generally of the Left persuasion) beat the drum of anthropogenic warming and prepare national, regional and global responses that are economic lunacy - and worse will have not a jot of influence over the climate of what is at best a continuing variable world we live in, while consigning the poor to advanced penury for ever.

That is unforgiveable.

IPCC's Trenberth's continuing off handed-ness is even more galling:

"None of the models used by IPCC is initialized to the observed state and none of the climate states in the models corresponds even remotely to the current observed climate”.

Given the advanced paranoia - the sky is falling in - displayed by those shamed into 'green' responses and the billions extorted by the research community from guilt ridden governments how can Trenberth glibly state the models are not calibrated to a start point at the observed state or recalibrated to current observed states?

The reason of course is the calibration or recalibration cannot occur because the models are purely scenarios... they say what they say. It is not possible to calibrate them.

Again - the crime of the IPCC has been to allow the global politerati to use those models as statements of fact, and not pull them up short. This is corruption of thought, corruption of process and corruption of intellectual process.

We may have intercepted the barbarian's at the gate - Clark's carbon fancy needs to be exposed and National needs to get off the band wagon quickly - before the wheels fall off.

No comments: