Independent assessment of UN climate change report refutes alarmist claims made in official “Summary for Policymakers”
An independent review of the science of climate change contradicts in many respects the official Policymakers Summary released on Friday in Paris – calling into question the validity of the claims made by the UN.
The new report was produced for the renowned Fraser Institute, a member of the Civil Society Coalition on Climate Change. Written by a panel of 10 internationally-recognized experts, it is an assessment of a draft of the first section of the forthcoming report from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
“The debate around climate change has become highly politicized and alarmist. So we asked a team of highly qualified scientists to look at the IPCC report and produce a summary that they felt communicates the real state of knowledge. Our intent with this document is to allow people to see for themselves what is known and what remains highly uncertain within climate change science.” said Dr. Ross McKitrick, coordinator of the report.
This “Independent Summary for Policymakers” concludes:
- On the basis of the most accurate measures available -- weather satellites – there is little evidence of atmospheric warming since 1979 (when satellite records begin).
- No compelling evidence that dangerous or unprecedented changes in the climate are underway.
- No globally-consistent pattern in long-term precipitation trends, snow-covered area, or snow depth.
- Current data suggest a global mean sea level rise of between two and three millimeters per year.
- Observed climate change cannot be attributed to a specific cause, such as increased atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations. Attribution studies relying on computer simulations do not take into account the uncertainty inherent in climate models, nor do they adequately account for many potentially important influences such as aerosols, solar activity, and land use changes.
“There is no evidence provided by the IPCC report that the uncertainty around climate change can be formally resolved from first principles, statistical hypothesis testing or modeling exercises,” McKitrick said.
“What does this mean for the average person? It means that while scientific evidence shows the climate is naturally variable, we still don’t know the extent to which humans are contributing to future climate change and whether or not such change is a good or bad thing. People who are bewildered by the intense global warming alarmism of the past few years should read the Independent Summary for Policymakers to get a more accurate and balanced understanding of the real state of knowledge on this important subject.”
Said Julian Morris, executive director of International Policy Network, “this important report brings much needed realism to the climate change debate, which has been dominated by alarmism.”
To read the report select the link above to rad the pdf file