Essay by Eric Worrall
“I would like to see a situation where scientists make recommendations and then you track them. You ask governments to sign off on what they will do and then you evaluate how much progress they have made.”
We need power to prescribe climate policy, IPCC scientists say
Exclusive: Five IPCC report authors say scientists should be allowed to make policy prescriptions and potentially oversee implementation
Arthur Neslen
Fri 8 Dec 2023 00.00 AEDTSenior climate experts are calling for an overhaul of the structure and powers of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in despair at the slow pace of climate action.
Five lead authors of IPCC reports told the Guardian that scientists should be given the right to make policy prescriptions and, potentially, to oversee their implementation by the 195 states signed up to the UN framework convention on climate change (UNFCCC).
…
Yamina Saheb, the lead author of a chapter in AR6, said: “I would like to see a situation where scientists make recommendations and then you track them. You ask governments to sign off on what they will do and then you evaluate how much progress they have made.”
…
“I think this Cop will demonstrate the impossibility of viable climate diplomacy while the fossil fuel industry runs so many governments and infiltrates negotiating teams,” Steinberger said.
…
Not all IPCC scientists agree. Joyashree Roy, a coordinating lead author on AR6, argued that the IPCC was already becoming more independent and that transforming it into an oversight group would lead to “fragmented decisions [that] cannot solve this unique problem for humanity”.
…
Read more: https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/2023/dec/07/we-need-power-to-prescribe-climate-policy-ipcc-scientists-say
What can I say? Thanks for offering to take away my freedom, but I have a recommendation for where you can shove your idea.
These folks should be in a padded cell while we investigate
their intelligence and mental health.
Megolomania and delusions. There, instant diagnosis.
And accurate
Narcissist and very egocentric fools that have failed to advance legitimate science during their careers!
Anthony Fauci essentially had that power in the US for at least a year. How did that turn out? Yes, these folks should be kept as far from the seats of power as possible.
Given how much grant monies were wasted by Fauci bribing scientists, he should be investigated for fiscal fraud.
I suspect that even most climate scientists don’t understand the physics of the atmospheric boundary layer and why that makes their “science” invalid. They are just as indoctrinated, maybe more so, than your average leftist.
Without climate science fiction they would not have jobs so will cling on to their comfort blanket for as long as they can while there is money in it.
Scientists and policy? What could possibly go wrong?
Jane Fonda has been a climate scientist for decades and decades.
Wasn’t she a climax scientist in her earlier years?
Not sure about scientist, more of an enthusiast I think.
She self identifies as a climate scientist.
Just before she blames racism for climate.
That was in Barbarella…
😉
A disappointing film in so many ways.
One of their finest climate scientists I believe, she taught Greta everything she knows….
Greta was brainwashed by her parents. I wouldn’t blame that on Fonda–as much as would like to.
According to Jane, she ostracized her father for decades before Golden Pond.
Apparently, it was the other way round if you can believe it. In a 2019 interview, Fonda said, “There is one issue that will determine the survival of our species. This is not hyperbole, this is real.”
Reporter, “Was there a turning point for you on this issue? Your passion is palpable.”
Fonda, “Well, I’ve been a climate scientist for decades and decades, but it was Greta Thunberg…”
I think Jane was having serious problems with her short term memory.
It is hard to listen to her then and now.
As my brother was a POW while she was doing her treason bit, I despise everything Fonda.
Understandable.
She is also a distinguished Nuclear Engineer (The China Syndrome).
Reminds me of a bumper
sticker An engineer at one my customers car had…” a nuclear power plant has a better body than Jane Fonda.”
A lady I dated bought one of Jane’s workout videos.
Years later, last I saw that video it was still shrink wrapped.
These guys could become just a infamous as Trofim Lysenko and for essentially the same reason, if they got their way.
First step: More funding.
Second step: Repeat step one until remaining funding equals zero.
And call it “revenue neutral”
These people need to be reminded that command and control economies always fail, usually violently. Just ask the former despots of the Soviet Union. Or the National Socialist despot in 1945. Or ask Mussolini how well command and control economies worked out for him.
Pol Pot firmly believed they were on the right track with this.
Pol Pot turned the surrounding intelligencia into worm food.
April 15 should be an international holiday in commemoration of Pol Pot becoming worm food in 1998.
The sorcerer’s apprentice wants to continue spreading mayhem. Only an idiot would think this was a good idea.
“Some ideas are so stupid that only intellectuals believe them.” – George Orwell
I still see a lot of faculty on campus wearing flimsy Chinese and Indian made surgical masks.
Because everyone knows that meteorologists can design the best electrical infrastructure.
I am not a meteorologist and haven’t even played one on television, but I feel a vague sense of indignation on behalf of real meteorologists that they are being accused of an association with the Infernal Perpetrators of the Climastrology Cult.
A more apt comparison is to the ayatollahs of Iran. Because everyone knows that religious fanatics make the best public policy.
Five lead authors of IPCC reports told the Guardian that scientists should be given the right to make policy prescriptions and, potentially, to oversee their implementation by the 195 states signed up to the UN framework convention on climate change (UNFCCC).
Uh, given the right – by whom? Who elected those dudes?
Time to resurrect the stocks.
Sure – you go get your stocks, thats a good idea. The rest of us will carry on with building our guillotines if it’s all the same to you?
Heads will roll for a change.
I’m not in favor of using guillotines – we need test subjects for medical research and spare parts.
not so bad with guillotnes, it takes out what those people have useless
Guillotines are too quick. They need something more drawn out and painful.
“Scientists”? More of leftist politicians who found climate change a useful stalking horse. The IPCC has shown vanishingly little interest in actually testing the basic assumptions of CAGW, which is purportedly the definition of science.
But not the purpose of AGW based policy.
It’s not just the Left.The youg Right is saying the same thing. Both are brainwashed.
In a recent Pew Research poll, in the US, two-thirds of Republicans under 30 supported the so-called “climate change” agenda.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/08/09/what-the-data-says-about-americans-views-of-climate-change/
#stuckrecord
I’ll give you the same answer:
Respondents who did not give an answer are not shown
Which probably means “we’ve skewed the data to give the answer we want people to see”
John Cook´s method
sheesh- only a fool would ever believe such polling- grow up!
Pew is decidedly leftist and very biased.
Their poll questions and oversight are tailored to get the result they and their customer desire.
Are they scientific or just informed on what the CAGW side says? List of Yale Study of the Questions from a few years ago.
Ordinary Climate-Science Intelligence Assessment (OCSI)
Climate scientists believe that if the North Pole icecap melted as a result of human-caused global warming, global sea levels would rise.
Climate scientists have concluded that globally averaged surface air temperatures were higher for the first decade of the twenty-first century (2000-2009) than for the last decade of the twentieth century (1990-1999).
Climate scientists believe that human-caused global warming will result in flooding of many coastal regions.
Climate scientists believe that human-caused global warming has increased the number and severity of hurricanes around the world in recent decades.
Climate scientists believe that nuclear power generation contributes to global warming.
Climate scientists believe that human-caused global warming will increase the risk of skin cancer in human beings.
Climate scientists and economists predict there will be positive as well as negative effects from human-caused global warming.
Climate scientists believe that the increase of atmospheric carbon dioxide associated with the burning of fossil fuels will reduce photosynthesis by plants.
What gas do most scientists believe causes temperatures in the atmosphere to rise? Is it [carbon dioxide, hydrogen, helium, radon]
Notice a pattern here? Are you rated scientifically Intelligent or just know what Climate scientists believe, conclude and predict?
Good time for a Rush quote – “The media uses polls to create news stories. I think polls are just an extension of the editorial page, an excuse to get them on the front page. You can ask any question you want, get any answer you want, and then run around with that as a news story.”
It’s my understanding that is the entire constitution of “Rationalia”, a proposed government described by astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson. The naivete of these people is breathtaking. Did they never take any history classes ever?
They know more and more about less and less and have now arrived at the point of knowing everything about nothing.
I’m going to steal that sentence for future use.
Tyson knows nothing about anything.
From what I have seen, the “esteemed” PhD of Philosophy in Astrophysics Neil deGrasse Tyson has gone down the rabbit hole into the echo chamber of his own making.
Every theory he comes up with sounds good to him and for some reason, he has favorable media coverage. F*** that Pluto killer.
FJB
These guys already have way too much power and influence. If anything their power and influence needs to be cut back. Cut back a lot, they have already caused enough trouble.
I would like to see scientists held accountable for their forecasts and pronouncements.
Yes. Rather than “… a situation where scientists make recommendations and then you track them.” independent investigators should track the predictions / forecasts / projections of the Climate Scientists nd see how they pan out. Then publish the results periodically, naming names. Sort of like what various authors do here at WUWT.
But they’ll be allowed to adjust the predictions to match the measurements and vice versa, right?
Remember that that they make no predictions. Only projections. There is an important legal difference.
One more step: fire those who are responsible for government pursuing policies based on their predictions which turn out to be wrong, creating monetary damages and human suffering.
Iirc, after Viner made his erroneous prediction of no more snow, councils in the UK reduced their spending on road salt and snow removal. When it snowed, they were caught short, roads were not cleared in a timely manner, and their were accidents with injuries and deaths.
What some ‘experts’ are doing is tantamount to yelling fire in a crowded theater.
The Guardian report includes a comment from Gert-Jan Nabuurs a coordinating lead author on IPCC reports questioning the value of continuing to produce assessment reports when “we already know that in five to six years’ time the message is not going to be very different, the problem [sic] will still be there”.
The jolly junkets will probably continue for a few more years but their irrelevance is beginning to sink in even to the keenest adherents,
I have been a scientist for the last 50 years or so, so I am dismayed by comments here about scientists causing harm. In real society, scientists have produced many, maybe most of the advances that we now enjoy, from drugs that actually do improve health, to better foods, to materials like plastics, to materiald from mines. Proper scientists need thanks.
Some here are confusing actual scientists with anti-scientists who fail to learn and use the rigorous Scientific Method.There is an occasional good paper from climate rtesearchers, but most are below par in the sense that they read like the authors are still in kindergarten instead of post-university. It really is that bad.
WUWT articles often reflect this poor standard of climate research. One of the more telling is from Willis Eschenbach on failed climate change poredictions, but the anti-science rabble has got at it to make it near-impossible to find by Internet search. Proper scientists welcome challenges to their work, because that often leads to improvement. These anti-science charleys and charlenes are into cancel culture as an art form. Like I wrote, kindergarten minds.
Geoff S
Here is one from Willis:
Failed Serial Doomcasters • Watts Up With That?
It should go without saying that commenters here are talking about the pseudoscientists dominating mainstream climate science not actual scientists following the scientific method. Real harm is being done in the name of science ignoring that’s not what they are practicing.
it is not ,science nor climatology , it is politics (stupids) Clinton dixit
I think a big part of the problem is the number of PhDs awarded. I know very few PhDs my age, but quite a few my children’s age. I’m sure there can’t be that many people out there doing great scientific work. I wouldn’t hire most of the young PhDs I know for something as simple as yard work.
The scientific technological elite Eisenhower warned us to not give our sovereignty to. They’ve been planning this a long time.
“…“I would like to see a situation where scientists make recommendations and then you track them. You ask governments to sign off on what they will do and then you evaluate how much progress they have made.”…”
I would like to see a situation where scientists make predictions and then you track them. And those that don’t come to fruition get ignored. And those that persist in their bullshit get tarred and feathered and ridden out of town on a rail.
I believe the “unique problem faced by humanity” referred to by Joyashree Roy, needing to be resolved, is the false impression generated by the IPCC and its advisors that there is a Climate Crisis.
The last thing on any thinking national administrations agenda should be the option to give technocrates in the UN, unfettered authority to command anything.
Put it back from whence it came.
Well we’ve known for decades that climate “science” is politicised, this is just a natural progression, not unexpected, surprised its taken them so long to think this thought bubble up.
Science!
I’ve never heard of Yamina Saheb
“. . . I have a recommendation for where you can shove your idea.”
There’s no room, because their heads are already there occupying the space.
no, there is enough room bacause they hold their feces inside their skulls, for they transform them in sentences
To put it politely, they can go swivel.
We have been evaluating the success, or lack thereof, of Klimate Scientists for the last 50 years and so far, they haven’t got anything right.
We keep telling them they’re wrong but they don’t listen, so what’s novel about this policy?
Oh, I think they listen and I think many of them agree with us, but they are scared to say so ‘cos if they do they know that they’ll lose their jobs or think they’ll look silly or both.
From the article: “Five lead authors of IPCC reports told the Guardian that scientists should be given the right to make policy prescriptions and, potentially, to oversee their implementation by the 195 states signed up to the UN framework convention on climate change (UNFCCC).”
Good luck getting China and India to go along.
Who will give these scientists power over China and India?
Another unrealistic propostion from climate alarmist scientists.
These climate alarmist scientists live in a dreamworld, or rather, a nightmareworld of their own making. They are divorced from reality.
the same group that told us the vaccines were safe and effective and that we should shut down the economy and bankrupt millions of people to stop stop something no deadlier than the flu
They learned a lot from that experimental model. More to come from where that all came from.
When a person becomes “an IPCC lead author” they are no longer “a scientist”, they are “a political appointee”.
One of the most well-known quotes by Richard Feynman regarding how real scientists should respond to (self-declared) “experts” is :
“Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.”
He also wrote the following :
If those “lead authors” don’t mind … or even if they [ expletive deleted ] do … I will take the word of the winner of a Nobel prize in a “hard” science (physics) over theirs any day of the millennium.
If self-declared “expert scientists” ever do get to decide which “policy prescriptions” are to be implemented, then everyone will know that we are witnessing the last days of “science” (/ the Enlightenment).
_ _ _ _ _
PS : In one of my “Quotes.txt” files the following is listed under “WSJ editorial, 16/6/2016”.
It may require some “fact checking” …
Belief in climate models is like belief in fantasies, neither agree with reality.
The problem is that scientists, as a group, do not have a good prediction track record.
It’s not just about the funding for them. It is also about control, power, and fear.
“One must always keep the tools of statecraft sharp and ready. Power and fear—sharp and ready.”
-Baron Vladimir Harkonnen (Dune)
It turns out all the “tipping points” are psychological/ social/ political – sort of psychotic break on a mass scale. We need a very large padded cell.
They want to be climate scientists, I have a question for each of them:
Sonia Seneviratne, did IPCC scientists sub-press a peer-reviewed published article using political power they gained from the IPCC process rather than scientific arguments?
(In context to climate scientists successfully censoring a peer reviewed and published article by Alimonti et al. earlier this year, circumventing the scientific process like it was done by the catholic church in the middle age, the names of these people are:
Greg Holland, Lisa Alexander, Steve Sherwood, Michael Mann, Richard Betts, Friederike Otto, Stefan Rahmstorf and Peter Cox
https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/think-of-the-implications-of-publishing )
Gert-Jan Nabuurs, are the IPCC reports scientifically honest and integer?
(In context with the amazing speech by R. Feynman´s about cargo cult science and it´s one paragraph:
“””[..] a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty—a kind of leaning over backwards. For example, if you’re doing an experiment, you should report everything that you think might make it invalid—not only what you think is right about it: other causes that could possibly explain your results; and things you thought of that you’ve eliminated by some other experiment, and how they worked—to make sure the other fellow can tell they have been eliminated.[..] “”” https://calteches.library.caltech.edu/51/2/CargoCult.htm )
Julia Steinberger, is the number of global natural disasters increasing?(In context to Alimonti and Mariani´s finding “These observations are supported by piecewise regression analyses that identify three breakpoints (1922, 1975, 2002), with the most recent subperiod 2002–2022 characterized by a significant decline in number of events. A similar pattern over time is exhibited by contemporaneous number of geophysical disasters – volcanoes, earthquakes, dry landslides – which, by their nature, are not significantly influenced by climate or anthropogenic factors. We conclude that the patterns observed are largely attributable to progressively better reporting of natural disaster events” https://doi.org/10.1080/17477891.2023.2239807 )
Yamina Saheb, why are the models so consistently wrong including the current generation of models?
(In context AMOC data “””[..] As our confidence in future climate projections depends largely on the ability to model the past climate, we take an in-depth look at the difference in the twentieth century evolution of the AMOC based on observational data (including direct observations and various proxy data) and model data from climate model ensembles. We show that both the magnitude of the trend in the AMOC over different time periods and often even the sign of the trend differs between observations and climate model ensemble mean[..]””” https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rsta.2022.0193 )
Glen Peters, why does IPCC use flawed science?
(In context the hockey stick publication and in particular McShane and Wyners critique on the missing mathematical treatment proxy selection, which is also true for most other reconstruction studies used by IPCC:“”” [..]Consequently, the application of ad hoc methods to screen and exclude data increases model uncertainty in ways that are ummeasurable and uncorrectable.[..] “”” https://www.jstor.org/stable/23024822 )
Commenting on the notion of Jane Fonda as climate scientist, previous anti-nuclear power activist:
Edward Teller was a guest lecturer here in Norway some years ago: “I’m a better actor than Jane Fonda is a nuclear scientist”.
We’ve enough home grown idiots without contracting out nut zero policy to even more unelected globalists
“It’s said that science will dehumanize people and turn them into numbers. That’s false, tragically false. Look for yourself. This is the concentration camp and crematorium at Auschwitz. This is where people were turned into numbers. Into this pond were flushed the ashes of some four million people. And that was not done by gas. It was done by arrogance, it was done by dogma, it was done by ignorance. When people believe that they have absolute knowledge, with no test in reality, this is how they behave. This is what men do when they aspire to the knowledge of gods.
Science is a very human form of knowledge. We are always at the brink of the known; we always feel forward for what is to be hoped. Every judgment in science stands on the edge of error and is personal. Science is a tribute to what we can know although we are fallible. In the end, the words were said by Oliver Cromwell: “I beseech you in the bowels of Christ: Think it possible you may be mistaken.”
I owe it as a scientist to my friend Leo Szilard, I owe it as a human being to the many members of my family who died here, to stand here as a survivor and a witness. We have to cure ourselves of the itch for absolute knowledge and power. We have to close the distance between the push-button order and the human act. We have to touch people.”
Dr Jacob Bronowski – from his landmark series ‘The Ascent of Man’
Seconded!
Your splendid motion carries, Eric!
Is that somewhere lacking in solar power?
Eric, may I be allowed to cross-post a comment I made at NALOPKT? It is on topic and talks to the theme if your post.
‘History has a way of repeating itself (you know the rest)….but I’m thinking that, once again, we (not sure yet quite how many of ‘we’ there are) have come to the point where the NZCs need to be defeated once more before they ruin Western society. Just to expand on the simile: I look on the JSO crowd as the modern-day Brown-shirts of the 1930s (but JSO idiots don’t do history).’