Bjorn Lomborg: 'Sadly, accurate science doesn’t make for good television; predicting the end of times does.'
But even this report revealed: “Drought statistics over the entire contiguous US have declined,” the report finds, reminding us that “the Dust Bowl era of the 1930s remains the benchmark drought and extreme heat event.”
Report also found: On flooding, the assessment accepts the IPCC’s finding, which “did not attribute changes in flooding to anthropogenic [human] influence nor report detectable changes in flooding magnitude, duration or frequency.”
CNN’s headline, screaming that “climate change will shrink [US] economy” by 10 percent, a figure also repeated on The New York Times front page. Actually, the UN’s climate scenarios envision US GDP per capita will more than triple by the end of this century, so this 10 percent reduction would come from an economy 300 percent larger than it is today....So, even a 5 percent reduction in the size of the American economy only follows from picking unlikely worst-case scenarios.
The well-reported idea that warming will shrink the economy by 10 percent disregards huge economic growth, assumes twice the damages of the worst-case temperatures the report itself expects and even then only finds such high costs stemming almost exclusively from easily preventable heat deaths.
Conjecturing that the temperature-mortality relationship in the US would remain constant over a century is ludicrous.
"The 468-page report released by the USGCRP is filled with speculative claims presented as if they are established science. The authors use “expert Judgement” to support their conclusions. The experts have an obvious financial and emotional stake in global warming doomsday scenarios. If the global warming doomsday is shown to be imaginary, the experts will lose their financial support and in many cases their jobs...
Its reports imitate the style and approach of the United Nations International Panel On Climate Change (IPCC). The USGCRP uses the IPCC as a trusted source."
The report is full of "supposed experts with only one point of view, that we are threatened by doomsday global warming."
Dr. Pat Michaels: The NA4 (fourth “National Assessment) and the accompanying Climate Science Special Report repeatedly state that models show anthropogenic emissions are responsible for almost all 20th-century warming.
This is claimed despite the fact that of the two twentieth-century warmings; the first one, approximately from 1910 to 1945, could hardly have been a result of carbon dioxide emissions. The 1910-1945 warming is statistically similar in slope to the 1976-1997 warming.
Going back to 2000, there have been persistent problems throughout the entire assessment process, underscoring the need for major administrative change. For these and other reasons, draft NA4 should be shelved and reset, so that time and resources can be devoted to a new Assessment that corrects and addresses the first three Assessments and the draft NA4.
NA4 suffers from a fundamental methodological flaw in assuming that models making large bulk errors are representative of a range of future warming. Ubiquitous tuning of the models to the 20th-century history hardly increases their reliability.