Climate alarmists admit they are wrong after new report show the climate models are wrong and overstated

  According to this story a new report is out, of which its which conclusions were called “breathtaking” by one global warming sympathizer, that shows the models used to assess the effects of CO2 on global warming are wrong and overstated.

  Here is more:

Climate alarmists have finally admitted that they’ve got it wrong on global warming.

This is the inescapable conclusion of a landmark paper, published in Nature Geoscience, which finally admits that the computer models have overstated the impact of carbon dioxide on climate and that the planet is warming more slowly than predicted.

And here is even more:

The paper – titled Emission budgets and pathways consistent with limiting warming to 1.5 °C –  concedes that it is now almost impossible that the doomsday predictions made in the last IPCC Assessment Report of 1.5 degrees C warming above pre-industrial levels by 2022 will come true.

 

In order for that to happen, temperatures would have to rise by a massive 0.5 degrees C in five years.

Since global mean temperatures rarely rise by even as much as 0.25 degrees C in a decade, that would mean the planet would have to do 20 years’ worth of extreme warming in the space of the next five years.

This, the scientists admit, is next to impossible. Which means their “carbon budget” – the amount of CO2 they say is needed to increase global warming by a certain degree – is wrong. This in turn means that the computer models they’ve been using to scare the world with tales of man-made climate doom are wrong too.

Most striking is the fact that this report does not come from climate skeptics:

The scientists who’ve written this paper aren’t climate skeptics. They’re longstanding warmists, implacable foes of climate skeptics, and they’re also actually the people responsible for producing the IPCC’s carbon budget.

In other words, this represents the most massive climb down from the alarmist camp.

But why stop there?

According to the London Times:

 Michael Grubb, professor of international energy and climate change at University College London and one ofthe study’s authors, admitted that his previous prediction had been wrong.

He stated during the climate summit in Paris in December 2015: “All the evidence from the past 15 years leads me to conclude that actually delivering 1.5C is simply incompatible with democracy.”

Speaking to The Times, he said: “When the facts change, I change my mind, as Keynes said.

“It’s still likely to be very difficult to achieve these kind of changes quickly enough but we are in a better place than I thought.”

  When facts change, I change my mind? Facts do not change, facts are facts, our understanding of the facts might change as we learn more but the facts are constant. Truth is not subjective. Which means either these so-called scientists did not understand the facts or they misrepresented them to forward their agenda.

  Of course with so many people believing the lie about 97% of scientists believing global warming is fact–for more on the origins of this lie please see this post–I am sure the alarmists will claim this is just anecdotal evidence.

  These anecdotes keep adding up, I have written many skeptical posts on global warming siting such reports, sooner or later they must be taken seriously. Right? 

malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium