Total Pageviews

Thursday, July 2, 2020

Wild guess computer games using worst case CO2 growth rates = always wrong climate predictions

The coming 
climate crisis, 
allegedly coming 
since the 1970s, 
is based on climate 
computer games 
that often use the 
RCP8.5.worst-case 
CO2 emissions 
growth rate scenario.

Fears is driven by 
the worst case
RCP8.5 scenario.

RCP stands for 
“Representative 
Concentration 
Pathways” 
-- guesses of 
how much CO2
will accumulate 
in the air, from 
burning fossil fuels, 
in one century.

The United Nations’ 
Intergovernmental 
Panel on Climate 
Change (IPCC) 
created four RCP 
scenarios a decade ago.

RCP2.6 refers to 
a low CO2 emission 
scenario.

In the middle are 
RCP4.5 and RCP6.0.

RCP8.5 predicts 
unprecedented 
increases in global 
CO2 emissions.



For RCP8.5:
From the 1920s to 2000, 
global coal consumption 
stayed between 15 and 20 
gigajoules per capita, 
peaking at 20 in 1960, 
falling back to 15 by 2000, 
then rising to about 23 
earlier this decade with the 
industrialization of China 
and India. 

The International Energy 
Agency expects coal use
will gradually return to the 
15-20 gigajoule per capita 
range by 2040.

But the RCP8.5 scenario 
guesses that coal use 
will rise to about 
30 gigajoules by 2040, 
45 gigajoules by 2060 and 
70 gigajoules by 2100. 

No one seriously 
believes that a 
"return to coal" 
will happen ! 



RCP8.5 also projects 
so much economic growth 
that today’s poor countries 
will be richer in 2100 
than the wealthiest 
countries are today !



RCP8.5 is a VERY unlikely
worst-case scenario.

Yet many scientists 
and economists 
have been using RCP8.5 
as a 'business-as-usual' 
forecast. 

Climate Alarmist Game:
-- Feed RCP8.5 into
a climate model, 
predict a catastrophe, 
then call it the “likely” 
scenario if we don’t 
radically cut CO2 
emissions.

A more realistic
business-as-usual 
RCP scenario 
would make 
future global warming 
estimates harmless,
just as actual global 
warming in the past 
325 years has been.

Such a study 
would not get 
any media 
attention. 

Last fall, in 
Nature magazine, 
climate experts
Zeke Hausfather and 
Glen Peters scolded 
colleagues for 
misleading the public 
by using RCP8.5, 
and thereby distorting 
the policy debate.



In the 1970s and 1980s,
scientists also made 
CO2 projections 
-- reality came in 
near the bottom end:








For at least 30 years 
the IPCC has used 
exaggerated CO2 
emissions growth
scenarios.

Atmospheric sensitivity 
to CO2 estimates 
are also
much higher than
justified by actual 
measured warming 
in the past 75 years 
( based on a worst 
case estimate assuming, 
with no proof, 
that rising CO2 levels 
were the ONLY cause 
of past global warming.)

RCP8.5 takes 
climate alarmism 
to new heights.