cancel2 2022
Canceled
Last August, I described the terrible bind which was about to face the IPCC Stockholm meeting http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/31/can-the-ipcc-do-revolutionary-science/. Everybody knew the draft SPM was an embarrassment – the climate sensitivity range was far too high, the models were plainly wrong and the temperature ‘hiatus’ was left unexplained.
The IPCC had only three options – (i) re-run the models and re-draft the whole report, (ii) issue a string of caveats, or (iii) simply bluster on.
Pat Michaels and Chip Knappenburger ran a similar piece[SUP][1][/SUP] with three similar options. They predicted the IPCC would “do nothing and mislead policymakers and the rest of the world”.
After four days of intense debate and frantic wordsmithing amongst the Government representatives gathered at Stockholm, Thomas Stocker announced the final decisions at a media conference. There was no apparent backdown from the modeled temperature projections and no offer to re-run the models – just an assertion of increased certainty.
Read more: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/09/the-ipcc-discards-its-models/#more-100843
The IPCC had only three options – (i) re-run the models and re-draft the whole report, (ii) issue a string of caveats, or (iii) simply bluster on.
Pat Michaels and Chip Knappenburger ran a similar piece[SUP][1][/SUP] with three similar options. They predicted the IPCC would “do nothing and mislead policymakers and the rest of the world”.
After four days of intense debate and frantic wordsmithing amongst the Government representatives gathered at Stockholm, Thomas Stocker announced the final decisions at a media conference. There was no apparent backdown from the modeled temperature projections and no offer to re-run the models – just an assertion of increased certainty.
Read more: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/09/the-ipcc-discards-its-models/#more-100843
