New posts

Reply to thread

Message

Congratulations Wayne !! Well done. You win the Jackpot.
That was the 1,630,878th publication of some version of that story. Been going since Methuselah was running around in short pants. Certainly one of the well favoured denigrations of science and scientists by the the usual suspects.

I did my research and found out where this quote was cherry picked from and why it is so irrelevant . You can check out the attached letter.
Just to summarise. Professor Folland made this comment in discussion papers on the IPCC in 1993. At that stage, as he points out, there was insufficient physical climate data available do predictions of future global warming risks were based on modals.

However from 1995 onwards fundamental climate data started to become available. So this quote is just an irrelevant , out of context spin to undermine the work of climate scientists.

Dear Mr Battig

Thanks for your request. You are about the fifth person to ask me this in the last ten years or more.

What you quote a very abbreviated report of a much longer discussion at least 22 years ago! - soon after the 1990 IPCC report and possibly around the time of the 1992 Supplementary Report. I cannot be sure to which sceptical scientist it was made but it may have been Pat Michaels - and possibly others with him. Please check with Pat.

At that time, the key driver for nations' concern about climate change was indeed mostly driven by model projections of global warming. The attached published letter written in an Institute of Physics journal by myself and one of the then IPCC Working Group 1 coordinators tried to accurately reflect the general view at that time (1993). It reflects accurately what I was trying to say the year or so before. Please quote these words as appropriate – but they were only appropriate in the early 1990s. This view was soon to change greatly; notice that the letter looks forward at its end to a greatly increased importance of climate data to the climate change debate, and to nations' policy actions and concerns.

The situation is now very different and has been since about 1995. Up to 1993, there were no published detection and attribution studies. The situation had changed by the 1995 IPCC report with the first published detection and attribution studies and since then the many results of these studies have become the most quoted and influential aspect of all the IPCC Reports. Detection and attribution depends critically on observed climate data as well as climate models. It had centre stage of course in the 2001, 2007 and 2013 IPCC reports. So climate data started to move to centre stage by the mid 1990s and was definitely right there by 2001 when I was a convening lead author of the 2001 Report. Observed data and climate models are now equally important and vital to each other. This was further helped by the fact that in 2001 the first error estimates of observed global mean temperatures were published (I lead the first paper) – much been improved conceptually but not greatly changed quantitatively in recent years - and now available for everywhere location in the world. So great efforts continue to go on into improving data by the leading climate scientists of the world using ever more advanced statistics. I, of course, have devoted considerable time since 1990 to climate data, uncertainties, and assessing the climate changes, and importantly, the variations, that they show.

________________

In any case in 2023 we don't need to look at climate models to wonder if global heating is affecting us. 30 years later we are seeing the unfolding of the predictions made in the 1990's
[URL unfurl="true"]https://apnews.com/article/flooding-rainfall-climate-change-warming-atmosphere-d207e68ba3374bdc2df3d36e97a84a1b[/URL]

[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jul/14/us-west-extreme-temperatures-heatwave-weather[/URL]
[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jul/14/phoenix-heatwave-summer-extreme-weather-arizona[/URL]
[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/15/europe-heatwave-red-alerts-italy-cities-weather[/URL]
[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2023/jul/10/monsoon-fatal-landslides-floods-northern-india-video-report[/URL]

<blockquote data-quote="basilio" data-source="post: 1236105" data-attributes="member: 18692">Congratulations Wayne !!&nbsp; Well done.&nbsp; You win the Jackpot.&nbsp;That was the&nbsp; 1,630,878th publication of some version of that story. Been going since Methuselah was running around in short pants. Certainly one of&nbsp; the well favoured denigrations of science and scientists by the the usual suspects.I did my research and found out where this quote was cherry picked from and why it is so irrelevant .&nbsp; You can check out the attached letter. Just to summarise. Professor Folland made this comment in discussion papers on the IPCC in 1993. At that stage, as he points out, there was insufficient physical climate data available do predictions of future global warming risks were based on modals.However from 1995 onwards fundamental climate data started to become available. So this quote is just an irrelevant , out of context spin to undermine&nbsp; the work of climate scientists.Dear Mr BattigThanks for your request. You are about the fifth person to ask me this in the last ten years or more.What you quote a very abbreviated report of a much longer discussion at least 22 years ago! - soon after the 1990 IPCC report and possibly around the time of the 1992 Supplementary Report. I cannot be sure to which sceptical scientist it was made but it may have been Pat Michaels - and possibly others with him. Please check with Pat. At that time, the key driver for nations&#039; concern about climate change was indeed mostly driven by model projections of global warming. The attached published letter written in an Institute of Physics journal by myself and one of the then IPCC Working Group 1 coordinators tried to accurately reflect the general view at that time (1993). It reflects accurately what I was trying to say the year or so before. Please quote these words as appropriate – but they were only appropriate in the early 1990s. This view was soon to change greatly; notice that the letter looks forward at its end to a greatly increased importance of climate data to the climate change debate, and to nations&#039; policy actions and concerns.The situation is now very different and has been since about 1995. Up to 1993, there were no published detection and attribution studies. The situation had changed by the 1995 IPCC report with the first published detection and attribution studies and since then the many results of these studies have become the most quoted and influential aspect of all the IPCC Reports. Detection and attribution depends critically on observed climate data as well as climate models. It had centre stage of course in the 2001, 2007 and 2013 IPCC reports. So climate data started to move to centre stage by the mid 1990s and was definitely right there by 2001 when I was a convening lead author of the 2001 Report. Observed data and climate models are now equally important and vital to each other. This was further helped by the fact that in 2001 the first error estimates of observed global mean temperatures were published (I lead the first paper) – much been improved conceptually but not greatly changed quantitatively in recent years - and now available for everywhere location in the world. So great efforts continue to go on into improving data by the leading climate scientists of the world using ever more advanced statistics. I, of course, have devoted considerable time since 1990 to climate data, uncertainties, and assessing the climate changes, and importantly, the variations, that they show. ________________In any case in 2023 we don&#039;t need to look at climate models to wonder if global heating is affecting us.&nbsp; 30 years later we are seeing the unfolding of the predictions made in the 1990&#039;s[URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://apnews.com/article/flooding-rainfall-climate-change-warming-atmosphere-d207e68ba3374bdc2df3d36e97a84a1b[/URL][URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jul/14/us-west-extreme-temperatures-heatwave-weather[/URL][URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jul/14/phoenix-heatwave-summer-extreme-weather-arizona[/URL][URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/15/europe-heatwave-red-alerts-italy-cities-weather[/URL][URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2023/jul/10/monsoon-fatal-landslides-floods-northern-india-video-report[/URL]</blockquote>

[QUOTE="basilio, post: 1236105, member: 18692"] Congratulations Wayne !! Well done. You win the Jackpot. That was the 1,630,878th publication of some version of that story. Been going since Methuselah was running around in short pants. Certainly one of the well favoured denigrations of science and scientists by the the usual suspects. I did my research and found out where this quote was cherry picked from and why it is so irrelevant . You can check out the attached letter. Just to summarise. Professor Folland made this comment in discussion papers on the IPCC in[B] 1993. [/B]At that stage, as he points out, there was insufficient physical climate data available do predictions of future global warming risks were based on modals. However from 1995 onwards fundamental climate data started to become available. So this quote is just an irrelevant , out of context spin to undermine the work of climate scientists. [B]Dear Mr Battig Thanks for your request. You are about the fifth person to ask me this in the last ten years or more. What you quote a very abbreviated report of a much longer discussion at least 22 years ago! - soon after the 1990 IPCC report and possibly around the time of the 1992 Supplementary Report. I cannot be sure to which sceptical scientist it was made but it may have been Pat Michaels - and possibly others with him. Please check with Pat. At that time, the key driver for nations' concern about climate change was indeed mostly driven by model projections of global warming. The attached published letter written in an Institute of Physics journal by myself and one of the then IPCC Working Group 1 coordinators tried to accurately reflect the general view at that time (1993). It reflects accurately what I was trying to say the year or so before. Please quote these words as appropriate – but they were only appropriate in the early 1990s. This view was soon to change greatly; notice that the letter looks forward at its end to a greatly increased importance of climate data to the climate change debate, and to nations' policy actions and concerns.[/B] [I][B]The situation is now very different and has been since about 1995[/B][/I][B]. Up to 1993, there were no published detection and attribution studies. The situation had changed by the 1995 IPCC report with the first published detection and attribution studies and since then the many results of these studies have become the most quoted and influential aspect of all the IPCC Reports. Detection and attribution depends critically on observed climate data as well as climate models. It had centre stage of course in the 2001, 2007 and 2013 IPCC reports. So climate data started to move to centre stage by the mid 1990s and was definitely right there by 2001 when I was a convening lead author of the 2001 Report. Observed data and climate models are now equally important and vital to each other. This was further helped by the fact that in 2001 the first error estimates of observed global mean temperatures were published (I lead the first paper) – much been improved conceptually but not greatly changed quantitatively in recent years - and now available for everywhere location in the world. So great efforts continue to go on into improving data by the leading climate scientists of the world using ever more advanced statistics. I, of course, have devoted considerable time since 1990 to climate data, uncertainties, and assessing the climate changes, and importantly, the variations, that they show. [/B] ________________ In any case in 2023 we don't need to look at climate models to wonder if global heating is affecting us. 30 years later we are seeing the unfolding of the predictions made in the 1990's [URL unfurl="true"]https://apnews.com/article/flooding-rainfall-climate-change-warming-atmosphere-d207e68ba3374bdc2df3d36e97a84a1b[/URL] [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jul/14/us-west-extreme-temperatures-heatwave-weather[/URL] [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jul/14/phoenix-heatwave-summer-extreme-weather-arizona[/URL] [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/15/europe-heatwave-red-alerts-italy-cities-weather[/URL] [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2023/jul/10/monsoon-fatal-landslides-floods-northern-india-video-report[/URL] [/QUOTE]

Verification