Climate Change: Global Warming Claims Exaggerated?

Climate Change

Mail on line reported on September 14, 2013 that the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that computer models got the rate of global warming wrong. According to the leaked report, the globe warmed at a quarter of the rate previously reported by the IPCC in 2007.

Climate change science has bClimate Changeeen questioned previously, but has been shrugged off as ridiculous by climate change promoters in their quest to push sustainable energy. Opponents of the XL Keystone pipeline have used the 2007 data to predict the demise of the planet if the Alberta Oilsands development were expanded. Billions have been spent in an effort to reduce carbon emissions, including carbon capture sequestration (CCS) technology.

Global warming, climate change science and the urgency of saving the planet have been on the agenda of environmentalists. President Obama has used these claims to delay the XL Keystone pipeline, shut down coal powered plants and to implement new regulations that are meant to reduce carbon emission reductions.

The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is the foremost authority for environmentalist, politicians and experts and its six-yearly assessments are used as gospel to implement carbon taxes or tougher regulations on carbon emissions.

In its previous report, which covered the period it claimed, based on computer models, that the globe had warmed over the 15 years from 1990-2005 at a rate of 0.2C per decade, and it predicted this would continue for the following 20 years. The leaked report refutes this data as being exaggerated and says the observed warming over 15 years to 2012 was closer 0.05C per decade, well below any earlier computer predictions. Despite this new data, the IPCC maintains that by 2035 the globe will warm by another 0.4C.

Carbon EmissionsThe 31-page ‘summary for policymakers’ is based on a more technical 2,000-page analysis which will be issued at the same time. It also surprisingly reveals: IPCC scientists accept their forecast computers may have exaggerated the effect of increased carbon emissions on world temperatures – and not taken enough notice of natural variability.

They recognize the global warming ‘pause’ first reported by The Mail on Sunday last year is real – and concede that their computer models did not predict it. But they cannot explain why world average temperatures have not shown any statistically significant increase since 1997.

They admit large parts of the world were as warm as they are now for decades at a time between 950 and 1250 AD – centuries before the Industrial Revolution, and when the population and CO2 levels were both much lower.

The IPCC admits that while computer models forecast a decline in Antarctic sea ice, it has actually grown to a new record high. Again, the IPCC cannot say why. Mail on line

Curbing carbon emissions has become a second term priority of President Obama. The EPA is set to release its new carbon cutting regulations on Friday, which will make new coal fired plants impossible unless they use new costly technology to cut emissions.

Ahead of the release, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy and Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz testified before the House Energy and Power Subcommittee on Wednesday. According to Ed Whitfield (R-KY) the hearing was called to examine “the scope of federal climate-change actions that have been tolling billions of dollars a year in spending and countless man-hours of work since the mid-1990s, reaching over $22 billion this year alone.” Whitfield intends to introduce a bill to block the EPA’s new regulations as soon as they are released.

While the primary battle for the 2014 mid-term elections seems to be a battle over ObamaCare, EPA regulations on carbon emission reductions and climate change are sure to be raised in coal producing states.

Despite the outcry of the Republican dominated House of Representatives, the EPA will go ahead and roll out its new carbon cutting emission regulations. President Obama was clear during his State of the Union address that this will be a priority for his administration during his second term. Regardless of any legislation to block the regulations, it is unlikely to see the light of day in the Senate, where it will be dead on arrival.

President Obama has continuously delayed the decision on the XL Keystone pipeline and Canada’s Prime Minister Stephen Harper has said that he will synchronize Canadian emission standards with those of the U.S. in order to gain approval for the pipeline. Secretary of State John Kerry, a climate change advocate, is expected to make a recommendation to the president later this year. He said that the recommendation will be based on facts and science. The question is, which science?

The Conservative Search Engine

About the Author

Karl Gotthardt - Politisite Managing Editor Maj. Gotthardt is a Retired Military Officer with 35 years service in the Canadian Armed Forces. He spent most of his time in the Military in Infantry Battalions. Karl took part in training for Afghanistan as an Operator Analyst with the Canadian Maneouvre Training Centre. Karl is a qualified military parachutist and military free fall parachutist. He earned his U.S. Master Jump Wings in Fort Benning, Georgia. Karl enjoys working with horses for the last 24 year. He owns six. He has experience in breeding, training and of course riding.Karl was born in Germany and is fluent in both English and German and he speaks enough French to "get in trouble". Karl has written or writes at NowPublic, All Voices, Tek Journalism and many others.

Author Archive Page

2 Pingbacks/Trackbacks

  • Pingback: Politics of climate change – Manipulation of data? | PolitiSite

  • Karl Gotthardt

    You’re entitled to spin it any way you want, the fact is that global warming has slowed despite an increase in GHG emissions. This is exactly why the ICPCC scientists are struggling with an explanation. BTW I am not denying anything, what I am saying is that the predictions have been grossly exaggerated. Of course, we could shut down all energy that requires fossil fuels and then see where solar and wind power gets us. Whether some like it or not, green sustainable energy is not ready for prime time.

    My contention would be that the problem is consumption and the hunger in the West for energy is one of the biggest problems. Some of the biggest abusers or users of carbons are those people that profess to try to cut GHGs. All you need to do is to look at freeways in California on any given day or rush hour traffic in major US cities.

  • Pingback: Germany's Green Experiment turns into Energy Poverty | PolitiSite

  • jfreed27

    Is it cooling? No. It continues to warm. 10 of the last 15 years are the hottest on record.

    We have had more than 340 consecutive months of higher average temperatures compared to the average for that month during the 20th Ce. Just chance? less than 1 divided by the number of stars in the universe, or flipping heads 340 times in a row. If you look at the last 40 years the IPCC predictions have been quite good.

    And BTW, if any of you deniers out there are making a lousy buck peddling your drivel, I pray you choke on that blood money.