{"id":5156,"date":"2011-02-22T21:20:00","date_gmt":"2011-02-22T21:20:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sonicfrog.net\/?p=5156"},"modified":"2011-02-22T21:36:31","modified_gmt":"2011-02-22T21:36:31","slug":"defunding-the-ipcc-a-view-from-a-denier","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sonicfrog.net\/?p=5156","title":{"rendered":"Defunding The IPCC &#8211; A View From A &#8220;Denier&#8221;."},"content":{"rendered":"<div style=\"padding-bottom:20px; padding-top:10px;\" class=\"hupso-share-buttons\"><!-- Hupso Share Buttons - https:\/\/www.hupso.com\/share\/ --><a class=\"hupso_toolbar\" href=\"https:\/\/www.hupso.com\/share\/\"><img src=\"https:\/\/static.hupso.com\/share\/buttons\/share-medium.png\" style=\"border:0px; padding-top: 5px; float:left;\" alt=\"Share Button\"\/><\/a><script type=\"text\/javascript\">var hupso_services_t=new Array(\"Twitter\",\"Facebook\",\"Google Plus\",\"Pinterest\",\"Linkedin\",\"StumbleUpon\",\"Digg\",\"Reddit\",\"Bebo\",\"Delicious\");var hupso_background_t=\"#EAF4FF\";var hupso_border_t=\"#66CCFF\";var hupso_toolbar_size_t=\"medium\";var hupso_image_folder_url = \"\";var hupso_url_t=\"\";var hupso_title_t=\"Defunding%20The%20IPCC%20-%20A%20View%20From%20A%20%22Denier%22.\";<\/script><script type=\"text\/javascript\" src=\"https:\/\/static.hupso.com\/share\/js\/share_toolbar.js\"><\/script><!-- Hupso Share Buttons --><\/div><p>Atmospheric Scientist Dr Roy Spencer, who also maintains and administers one of the two official satellite gathered climate \/ temperature archives, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.drroyspencer.com\/2011\/02\/on-the-house-vote-to-defund-the-ipcc\/\">has this to say<\/a> about the recent Republican proposal to defund the U.S. obligation to the IPCC. <\/p>\n<blockquote><p>The climate change deniers have no one but themselves to blame for last night\u2019s vote.<\/p>\n<p>I\u2019m talking about those who deny NATURAL climate change. Like Al Gore, John Holdren, and everyone else who thinks climate change was only invented since they were born.<\/p>\n<p>Politicians formed the IPCC over 20 years ago with an endgame in mind: to regulate CO2 emissions. I know, because I witnessed some of the behind-the-scenes planning. It is not a scientific organization. It was organized to use the government-funded scientific research establishment to achieve policy goals.<\/p>\n<p>Now, that\u2019s not necessarily a bad thing. But when they are portrayed as representing unbiased science, that IS a bad thing. If anthropogenic global warming \u2013 and ocean \u2018acidification\u2019 (now there\u2019s a biased and totally incorrect term) \u2014 ends up being largely a false alarm, those who have run the IPCC are out of a job. More on that later.<!--more--><\/p>\n<p>I don\u2019t want to be misunderstood on this. IF we are destroying the planet with our fossil fuel burning, then something SHOULD be done about it.<\/p>\n<p>But the climate science community has allowed itself to be used on this issue, and as a result, politicians, activists, and the media have successfully portrayed the biased science as settled.<\/p>\n<p>They apparently do not realize that \u2018settled science\u2019 is an oxymoron.<\/p>\n<p>The most vocal climate scientists defending the IPCC have lost their objectivity. Yes, they have what I consider to be a plausible theory. But they actively suppress evidence to the contrary, for instance attempts to study natural explanations for recent warming.<\/p>\n<p>That\u2019s one reason why the public was so outraged about the ClimateGate e-mails. ClimateGate doesn\u2019t prove their science is wrong\u2026but it does reveal their bias. Science progresses by investigating alternative explanations for things. Long ago, the IPCC all but abandoned that search.<\/p>\n<p>Oh, they have noted (correctly I believe) that a change in the total output of the sun is not to blame. But there are SO many other possibilities, and all they do is dismiss those possibilities out of hand. They have a theory \u2014 more CO2 is to blame \u2014 and they religiously stick to it. It guides all of the research they do.<\/p>\n<p>The climate models are indeed great accomplishments. It\u2019s what they are being used for that is suspect. A total of 23 models cover a wide range of warming estimates for our future, and yet there is no way to test them for what they are being used for! climate change predictions.<\/p>\n<p>Virtually all of the models produce decadal time scale warming that exceeds what we have observed in the last 15 years. That fact has been known for years, but its publication in the peer reviewed literature continues to be blocked.<\/p>\n<p>My theory is that a natural change in cloud cover has caused most of the recent warming. Temperature proxy data from around the world suggests that just about every century in the last 2,000 years has experienced warming or cooling. Why should today\u2019s warmth be manmade, when the Medieval Warm Period was not? Just because we finally have one potential explanation \u2013 CO2?<\/p>\n<p>This only shows how LITTLE we understand about climate change\u2026not how MUCH we know.<\/p>\n<p>Why would scientists allow themselves to be used in this way? When I have pressed them on the science over the years, they all retreat to the position that getting away from fossil fuels is the \u2018right thing to do anyway\u2019.<\/p>\n<p>In other words, they have let their worldviews, their politics, their economic understanding (or lack thereof) affect their scientific judgment. I am ashamed for our scientific discipline and embarrassed by their behavior.<\/p>\n<p>Is it any wonder that scientists have such a bad reputation among the taxpayers who pay them to play in their ivory tower sandboxes? They can make gloom and doom predictions all day long of events far in the future without ever having to suffer any consequences of being wrong.<\/p>\n<p>The perpetual supply of climate change research money also biases them. Everyone in my business knows that as long as manmade climate change remains a serious threat, the money will continue to flow, and climate programs will continue to grow.<\/p>\n<p>Now, I do agree the supply of fossil fuels is not endless. But we will never actually \u201crun out\u201d\u2026we will just slowly stop trying to extract them as they become increasingly scarce (translation \u2013 more expensive). That\u2019s the way the world works.<\/p>\n<p>People who claim we are going to wake up one morning and our fossil fuels will be gone are either pandering, or stupid, or both.<\/p>\n<p>But how you transition from fossil fuels to other sources of energy makes all the difference in the world. Making our most abundant and affordable sources of energy artificially more expensive with laws and regulations will end up killing millions of people.<\/p>\n<p>And that\u2019s why I speak out. Poverty kills. Those who argue otherwise from their positions of fossil-fueled health and wealth are like spoiled children.<\/p>\n<p>The truly objective scientist should be asking whether MORE, not less, atmospheric carbon dioxide is what we should be trying to achieve. There is more published real-world evidence for the benefits of more carbon dioxide, than for any damage caused by it. The benefits have been measured, and are real-world. The risks still remain theoretical.<\/p>\n<p>Carbon dioxide is necessary for life on Earth. That it has been so successfully demonized with so little hard evidence is truly a testament to the scientific illiteracy of modern society. If humans were destroying CO2 \u2014 rather than creating more \u2014 imagine the outrage there would be at THAT!<\/p>\n<p>I would love the opportunity to cross examine these (natural) climate change deniers in a court of law. They have gotten away with too much, for too long. Might they be right? Sure. But the public has no idea how flimsy \u2013 and circumstantial \u2013 their evidence is.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, I doubt the IPCC will ever be defunded. Last night\u2019s vote in the House is just a warning shot across the bow. But unless the IPCC starts to change its ways, it runs the risk of being totally marginalized. It has almost reached that point, anyway.<\/p>\n<p>And maybe the IPCC leadership doesn\u2019t really care if its pronouncements are ignored, as long as they can jet around the world to meet in exotic destinations and plan where their next meeting should be held. I hear it\u2019s a pretty good gig.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>I have been wanting to write a post on this topic for the longest time \u2013 well, at least in the six years that I\u2019ve been blogging. What Dr. Spencer has written is what I\u2019ve wanted to write but could never quite get the words to portray the facts on the ground the way he have. Plus, my words would just be from a geology school drop-out! (calc killed the dream) and would come from general observations that the IPCC was set up with a goal already established \u2013 to regulate CO2. He, however, has the personal first-hand knowledge I lack and confirms what has been, for me, only a suspicion. <\/p>\n<p>Even though I don\u2019t exclude the possibility that CO2 could be a main driver, I also don\u2019t think it\u2019s as certain as the politically motivated consensus believes. As Dr Spencer notes, there are many aspects of natural variation that are very difficult by their very nature to quantify. But, because I don\u2019t subscribe to the &#8220;letter of the law&#8221;, as written in the holy manuscripts of the IPCC, I am, like him, labeled a \u201cdenier\u201d, as if I completely reject the possibility that CO2 IS the leading cause of the thirty year warming trend.<\/p>\n<p>So be it.<\/p>\n<p>As I will explain in the next post, I think it will be shown in the next five to seven years if the CO2 camp is able to maintain its certainty.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<div style=\"padding-bottom:20px; padding-top:10px;\" class=\"hupso-share-buttons\"><!-- Hupso Share Buttons - https:\/\/www.hupso.com\/share\/ --><a class=\"hupso_toolbar\" href=\"https:\/\/www.hupso.com\/share\/\"><img src=\"https:\/\/static.hupso.com\/share\/buttons\/share-medium.png\" style=\"border:0px; padding-top: 5px; float:left;\" alt=\"Share Button\"\/><\/a><script type=\"text\/javascript\">var hupso_services_t=new Array(\"Twitter\",\"Facebook\",\"Google Plus\",\"Pinterest\",\"Linkedin\",\"StumbleUpon\",\"Digg\",\"Reddit\",\"Bebo\",\"Delicious\");var hupso_background_t=\"#EAF4FF\";var hupso_border_t=\"#66CCFF\";var hupso_toolbar_size_t=\"medium\";var hupso_image_folder_url = \"\";var hupso_url_t=\"\";var hupso_title_t=\"Defunding%20The%20IPCC%20-%20A%20View%20From%20A%20%22Denier%22.\";<\/script><script type=\"text\/javascript\" src=\"https:\/\/static.hupso.com\/share\/js\/share_toolbar.js\"><\/script><!-- Hupso Share Buttons --><\/div><p>Atmospheric Scientist Dr Roy Spencer, who also maintains and administers one of the two official satellite gathered climate \/ temperature archives, has this to say about the recent Republican proposal to defund the U.S. obligation to the IPCC. The climate change deniers have no one but themselves to blame for last night\u2019s vote. I\u2019m talking [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[46,12],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sonicfrog.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5156"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sonicfrog.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sonicfrog.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sonicfrog.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sonicfrog.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=5156"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/sonicfrog.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5156\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5161,"href":"https:\/\/sonicfrog.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5156\/revisions\/5161"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sonicfrog.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=5156"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sonicfrog.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=5156"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sonicfrog.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=5156"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}