“Code Red” Overstates Actual Findings of IPCC Climate Report and Trends in Extreme Weather Events

Share Article

Objective review of the #ClimateReport by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reveals that it presents a far from ‘Code Red’ picture of climate change, says Friends of Science Society. Regarding extreme weather being attributed to human caused climate change, climate policy analyst Roger Pielke, Jr., notes the IPCC’s reference is the only study that makes such an assertion; 53 other studies (not cited) do not.

Not only is this ("Code Red") wrong, it is irresponsible. Nowhere does the IPCC report say that billions of people are at immediate risk

Media headlines, like those of Reuters, Aug. 9, 2021, proclaiming “Code Red for humanity” exaggerate the actual findings of the most recent climate report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says Friends of Science Society. Mainstream media quotes UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres’ claim with no further review of the report. As long-time climate policy analyst and extreme weather trends expert Roger Pielke, Jr. writes: “Not only is this wrong, it is irresponsible. Nowhere does the IPCC report say that billions of people are at immediate risk.”

Pielke, Jr. also tweeted: “IPCC WG1 recognizes disaster normalization. Great! There's 54 studies that IPCC could have cited in this literature. 53/54 claim no attribution of disaster losses to climate change. 1/54 claims attribution to climate change. Which papers were cited by IPCC? Only 1 (the 1/54)".

Meanwhile, youth activist Greta Thunberg claimed on Twitter that “the best odds of staying below 1,5 °C runs out in less than 5 and a half years”. In Feb. 2018, in Foreign Affairs, Ted Nordhaus, nephew of William Nordhaus, stated in “The Two Degree Delusion” that the original 2 °C target was entirely arbitrary and not based on science.

CLINTEL, the global climate intelligence organization of over 900 scientists and scholars who hold dissenting views on the alleged climate emergency issued a statement that the new IPCC report “offers little objective basis for policymaking” – which is supposed to be the point of the exercise.

Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt, long-time German environmentalist, IPCC expert reviewer, chemist, past environment minister, and author of several works on Sun’s influence on climate reportedly said that “One notices in the report that it’s primarily politically and less scientifically anchored.”

Vahrenholt also rejects the PAGES2k “the son of the hockey stick” graph, which he says “is as wrong as the model results” – model results which were ‘implausible’ and ‘wrong’ as reported July 27, 2021 by Science Magazine, quoting Gavin Schmidt of NASA GISS.

Stephen McIntyre, temperature proxy expert at Climate Audit, said about the new Hockey Stick diagram, "The calculation is a grotesque brew of data mining, ex post screening and lousy proxies.”

Vahrenholt questions IPCC claims that human-causation is greater than natural influences. “The IPCC is on very thin ice with this. It assumes rock solid that 100% of the warming since 1850 is man-made. All natural climate factors, which must have worked in former times (because the pre-industrial climate changed also significantly) must have been switched off today by 'magic hand'. How does that work?”

The Belgian group behind “Science, Climate and Energy” also were scathing in their review, writing that despite 14,000 references in the IPCC report, there is no mention of Dansgaard-Oeschger events.

They explain that “these are periods of extreme warming with increases of over 8 ° C in 40-50 years. Does that seem like little to you? Note that currently, the temperature change has been + 0.14 ° C / decade since January 1979, i.e. 0.01 ° C / year. The current increase is therefore + 0.7 ° C in 50 years which is more than 10 times lower than a DO event!”

The IPCC’s mandate is to focus on human causation of climate change. This process excludes necessary examination of natural climate influences, like the Sun. IPCC reports, especially the Summary for Policy Makers, are skewed to support carbon markets, unreliable renewables, and clean-tech.

Unfortunately, beside skewing the economies of the world, climate catastrophe headlines instill eco-anxiety and climate grief in the public and load children up with guilt, fear and resentment against their parents over an imaginary crisis based on faulty models and Global Mean Temperature Anomalies.

Friends of Science Society will host a live stream on August 12, 2021, at 7pm MT on “Code Red Climate Con and Magical NetZero Thinking”.

About

Friends of Science Society is an independent group of earth, atmospheric and solar scientists, engineers, and citizens that is celebrating its 19th year of offering climate science insights. After a thorough review of a broad spectrum of literature on climate change, Friends of Science Society has concluded that the sun is the main driver of climate change, not carbon dioxide (CO2).

Friends of Science Society
P.O. Box 23167, Mission P.O.
Calgary, Alberta
Canada T2S 3B1
Toll-free Telephone: 1-888-789-9597
Web: friendsofscience.org
E-mail: contact(at)friendsofscience(dot)org
Web: climatechange101.ca

Share article on social media or email:

View article via:

Pdf Print

Contact Author

Michelle Stirling
@FriendsOScience
Follow >
Visit website