by ROGER CROOK – PEAK climate scientists have admitted they were wrong about extreme weather scenarios, referring to their own modelling as “implausible”.
While cleaning up my email folder the other day I came across an extraordinary article on Substack by Roger Pielke Jr.
- Bowen must now go to the PM and Cabinet and inform them of the news.
- High electricity prices could have been avoided. We could have and should have built coal fired power stations.
- Those who sat at the feet of Greta Thunberg, including the United Nations, have been shown for what they are, fools.
Pielke is senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute with a serious academic background who now devotes most of his time to matters of the world’s climate.
Pielke published on his Substack of April 29 this year, and I must have been so totally distracted by what is happening in my life, that I completely missed his latest revelation, that is the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has just made a shattering statement.
DECADES
A new report has eliminated the most extreme scenarios, which have dominated climate research for several decades – specifically RCP8.5, SSP5–8.5 and SSP3–7.0.
This must be devastating news for climate science and the thousands who tell us every day that we are doomed because of climate change.
The IPCC has admitted the view is now that the extreme scenarios that have been part of our life for almost as long as I can remember, are wrong, or at least in the best words they can choose for a backdown “implausible”.
They write of seven scenarios and of the (now) obsolete high-end emissions scenarios.
“For the 21st century, this range will be smaller than assessed before: on the high-end of the range, the CMIP6 high emission levels have become implausible, based on the trends in the costs of renewables, the emergence of climate policy and recent emission trends.”
What this means is that the group the IPCC and the much broader world-wide research community has now admitted that the climate scenarios which they developed over many decades are in their words “implausible”. They ain’t going to happen.
The tens of thousands of research papers which are still being written and published using these scenarios and amplified by, at times, a hysterical media, and most damagingly have been passed into law in many countries, including Australia, have now been declared as “implausible”.
In other words what the climate scientists of the world have been telling us for a long as most of us can remember is wrong.
What is most shocking is the response this news has received in the press.
Roger Pielke has revealed that the media in America and the UK (we can include Australia) has not published a word of these findings.
Whereas the Dutch publication De Volkskrant ran the story on their front page on May 4 under the headline: UN Panel Drops Doomsday Scenario.
WRONG
The Berliner Zeitung was a little more balanced. Pielke reports that it reported that “extreme climate scenarios played too large a roll in public debate for too long” – while cautioning that the report does not mean that climate science research was fundamentally wrong.
Die Welt reported: “A lobby made RCP8.5 famous; the most sensationalist of all climate scenarios has determined scientific studies, media and politics – yet it is unrealistic. Now it is actually being phased out.”
Remarkably, Pielke says, none of this news made it into the English language press.
The New York Times has said nothing. The BBC ran a story on their More or Less programme, “Why did the climate change model get it wrong?”
Carbon Brief a specialist outlet for this kind of story – and all the stories about the catastrophic carbon in the world – has been silent.
Neither Science nor Nature has written about the cancellation of the most extreme consequences.
Apparently more than 2600 studies have been published this year using the high-end predictions, and of course there have been tens of thousands a year for many years using the now abandoned data.
What does this mean for Australia?
The first task must be to determine how this earth-shattering news can be quietly broken to Chris “blackout” Bowen, our minister for among other things “Climate Change”.
We have news for you Chris Bowen: all those doomsday scenarios you have been telling us about while happily wasting our money, they are not going to happen.
Bowen must now go to the Prime Minister and his colleagues in Cabinet and inform them of the news.
Tell them the doomsday scenarios which they have all promulgated for years and used as a vicious tool against other political Parties, especially One Nation, are wrong.
The billions which Bowen et al, extorted out of the this – along with previous governments – has been a waste of money, our money.
The high prices of our electricity could have been avoided, they are unnecessary, we could have and should have built coal fired power stations and kept Australia where it was; at the front of the pack!
Money could have gone to a thousand projects in Australia that would have benefitted the country and the community, not to subsidise overseas investors to cover our landscape with wind towers and solar panels.
Those who sat at the feet of people like Thunberg, right through to the United Nations, have been shown for what they are, fools.
They are the ones who have disparaged and viciously named others as deniers, climate deniers.
May the retributions begin.
They can start with “We told you it was rubbish!” PC
Climate change, global boiling, call it what you will, is a fraud, an ideological manipulation of the West which is promulgated by useful idiots of China, Russia and the ME which are not affected by the stupid policies which are destroying Western nations.
Scientifically it is gibberish:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-05-02/cox2c-stockwell—honest-jim3a-the-science-is-not-settled/1031292
The real problem apart from the corruption of science is the so called remedy, renewables, which are an even bigger fraud. Renewables will literally send the West back to the dark ages while the communist and islamic nations profit.
Really, if you believe in climate change you are a fool and possibly a treasonous fool.
Although I agree with all else you say it is quite wrong to suggest that ‘climate change’ does not exist. It exists all the time as climate is always changing, mostly subtly and unnoticed but sometimes more dramatically although not, so far, in our times. Man’s influence on the climate is minimal so all the net zero rubbish is just that – rubbish. We need CO2 to live for without it we and all other living life will die. The levels we have now are in the lower half so we must make sure it does not drop much lower.
So climate change is no longer a hot topic?
Clever!
Coming soon: Climate Stagnation!
Human beings have stalled the global climate and we will all have to suffer to get it started again!
Australia’s Net Zero by 2050 Target
Legal Status of the Target
Australia’s commitment to achieve net zero emissions by 2050 is not legally binding.
The target has not been enshrined in law, meaning there is no legal framework to enforce it.
Submission to the United Nations
The target has been formally submitted to the United Nations as part of Australia’s Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) under the Paris Agreement.
While Australia cannot weaken this target under the Paris Agreement, the commitment itself lacks legal enforceability.
Implications of the Current Framework
Without legislation, there is no mechanism for enforcement if Australia fails to meet its emissions target.
Experts indicate that while the target is mandatory to communicate and review, it does not carry legal consequences for non-compliance.
Summary
Australia’s net zero emissions target by 2050 is a significant commitment but remains a political pledge rather than a legally enforceable obligation.
The Coalition new policy before Glasgow COP 2021 included – “As in many other countries, renewable energy in Australia has been encouraged by government energy policy to limit climate change, reduce oil import dependency, and stimulate the economy.
A 2019 article raised concerns about environmental sustainability for future generations, as it seemed that the then federal government had no renewable energy policy beyond the year 2020. The Liberal Party’s energy minister, Angus Taylor, stated that the government would not be replacing the Renewable Energy Target (RET) after 2020.
06:43 PM ET 02/10/2015
Economic Systems: The alarmists keep telling us their concern about global warming is all about man’s stewardship of the environment. But we know that’s not true. A United Nations official has now confirmed this.
At a news conference last week in Brussels, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.
“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution,” she said.
Referring to a new international treaty environmentalists hope will be adopted at the Paris climate change conference later this year, she added: “This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.”
The only economic model in the last 150 years that has ever worked at all is capitalism. The evidence is prima facie: From a feudal order that lasted a thousand years, produced zero growth and kept workdays long and lifespans short, the countries that have embraced free-market capitalism have enjoyed a system in which output has increased 70-fold, work days have been halved and lifespans doubled.