[CC] IPCC Report to be released today

The IPCC report due to be released later today appears from media reporting to be a unsurprising catalogue of doom and gloom, so no nothing new there.

It is expected to link for the first time CO2 levels with the heat dome of the Western US, wild fires, and flooding.

The media have not yet reported on whether the document mentions that these have occurred before, to much greater extents, at periods where the effect of human activity was insignificant in planetary terms.

Dig deep, they want your money...

"We (the UN/IPCC) redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy..."

(written by an IPCC panel member, around 2010)

Reply to
Spike
Loading thread data ...

After having my browser checked multiple times (why??) I managed to navigate to the AR6 Synthesis Report outline. Thank goodness I'm using a VPN.

This from that document gives more than a hint of paranoia:

[Emphasis added]

=====

  1. Public code access

It is desirable that code used to produce figures from the SPM, TS and SR be archived, and eventually made publicly available and citable. However, if AR6 code is made public, bugs will inevitably be found. In a typical software development environment, bugs reports simply trigger a review process, corrections and a bug-fix release.

In the IPCC context, there is a *concern* *that* *bad* *faith* *actors* could *identify* *bugs* and disclose them at inopportune moments or blow them out of proportion in order to *inflict* *reputational* *damage*.

This risk of bugs creeping into the code can be mitigated by a review process, but not removed entirely. In any case, TG-Data would recommend against publicly releasing code that has not been reviewed by other authors within each chapter. =====

IOW, you can't see the code, just take it on faith, in the manner of a religion. No more Climategates here, thank you!

Presumably the 'Bad Faith Actors' are the people who can see that the emperor has no clothes, and aren't shy of saying so.

Reply to
Spike

Unsurprising. Also makes it easier to go back later and change the claims, in the style of Cummings' blogs.

What I find depressing is that there are so few alternative voices these days. I think Richard Feynman is worth a read:

formatting link

Reply to
newshound

Unfortunately, though, its the number and frequency which is the smoking gun, The weather is always unpredictable, certainly but even I can see that things are getting worse much more often than they used to so what would be your hypothesis of the cause of this? Brian

Reply to
Brian Gaff (Sofa

Now why is that? Perhaps because it's a settled issue and the consensus is overwhelming.

Reply to
mechanic

1) Science is never settled

2) What has concensus to do with it? Galileo went against the then prevailing consensus. So did Einstein, come to that.

Reply to
Tim Streater

Galileo ok

Einstein ? not so sure.

He took what was accepted (Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction, Michelson-Morley experiment, James Clark Maxwell's equation etc) and showed how a pretty simple theory couple unify it all

- special relativity.

He gave a theoretical explanation for Brownian motion.

He gave a theoretical model to explain the photoelectric effect (what he got the Nobel for) that took Plank's work further.

General Relativity ... mmmm

Reply to
Jim Jackson

Tim is probably referring to "god does not play dice".

Reply to
newshound

But it all depends on the timescale that you choose. If you look back from the 60's over a lifetime span, what you see is cooling. I vividly remember many individuals from my grandparents' generation lamenting the loss of the "long, hot summers" in the miserable, cold damp ones that prevailed in the 60's.

Reply to
newshound

OK perhaps Einstein not so much.

Reply to
Tim Streater

This is an interesting read, a couple of years old, but points out the differnce between regional variations/trends, to now, with a more global trend.

formatting link
Keith (Southend)

Reply to
Keith (Southend

I'm aware of those arguments. But the 1960s apocalyptic visions of famine were wrong. Now, if you want to see climate change with a real effect on much of the developed world, wait for the next ice age. For that matter, the end of the last one, which gave 125 metres sea level rise, ultimately changed us from foraging hunter gatherers to what we are now.

Reply to
newshound

Oh, he really did.

When you look at what Einstein did to science, he blew Cartesian Realism apart.

No more absolute Time, and then No more Flat Cartesian space.

The the quantum boys blew Determinism out of the water.

Followed by the Detached Observer.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

Einstein was awarded his PhD for an uncontroversial topic.

The consensus was to kick Relativity into the long grass.

Reply to
Spike

I think you might need to spell that out in more detail, for the benefit of the consensus scientists of uk.sci.weather.

Reply to
Spike

Perhaps there were heatwaves; however, UK temperature has generally been on the rise, including for the 70 years before the 1960s.

Reply to
Chris Bacon

Where did you get that info from?

Reply to
Spike

formatting link
UK, mean temperature, annual from the drop-down menus].

The trend line shows mean temperatures rose between about 1880 and 1950, then dipped a bit until 1965, then started increasing again until about

2000, since when the increase has tailed off significantly. But the annual variations are much larger than any underlying long-term increase.
Reply to
Algernon Goss-Custard

Most of these quoted clowns linger in the bozo bin, presumably discussing whether the Earth is flat! Is that settled?

Reply to
mechanic

Tell that to the residents of California and Greece watching their homes and towns burn.

Reply to
mechanic

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.