© Watts up with that
Science not settled, still in a state of flux - IPCC AR5 in disarray. It is looking like my single word quote in Rolling Stone "stillborn", will be accurate.
The title is my twist on what Dr. Judith Curry said in an email to David Rose in his latest article about the upcoming IPCC AR5 report:
Last night Professor Judith Curry, head of climate science at Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, said the leaked summary showed that 'the science is clearly not settled, and is in a state of flux'.She goes on to say:
She said it therefore made no sense that the IPCC was claiming that its confidence in its forecasts and conclusions has increased.Professor Myles Allen also got in a few licks, Prof Allen said:
For example, in the new report, the IPCC says it is 'extremely likely' - 95 per cent certain - that human influence caused more than half the temperature rises from 1951 to 2010, up from 'very confident' - 90 per cent certain - in 2007.
Prof Curry said: 'This is incomprehensible to me' - adding that the IPCC projections are 'overconfident', especially given the report's admitted areas of doubt.
'The idea of producing a document of near-biblical infallibility is a misrepresentation of how science works, and we need to look very carefully about what the IPCC does in future.'Rose also took Dana Nuccitelli and John Abraham to task at the Guardian over ugly death threat type comments that remain about their rebuttal to his article last week, while other comments are removed for not meeting "standards".
He is partly 'watts' wrong with the mainstream denialist perception of global warming. He and Lomborg are pretty good at what they do, which is confuse, obfuscate, distract and deny. They have both been debunked so many times it isn't even worth it any more.