IPCC Report

IPCC Report Slammed by Experienced Meteorologist Who Should Be Invited To Australia

My Commentary on Friday 12 October  examined the IPCC report and, inter alia, drew attention to the fact that “there have been two periods since the early 20th century when temperatures have been relatively stable despite CO2 concentration levels having increased strongly. This suggests little or no correlation between the two ie prima facie, this means that even though human activity does contribute to CO2 concentrations, they could be having only a minor effect on total temperatures”. I also pointed out that, as only a relatively small proportion of CO2 concentrations appear to stay in the atmosphere, this suggests that other factors are likely to be more causitative contributors to temperature increases. By contrast, the IPCC analysis implies that temperature increases are all due to increases in CO2 concentrations and that this conclusion is science-based.

Today we have received a report from the Daily Mail in London that in a London address a highly regarded meteorology professor and US Academy member, Richard Lindzen, said Australia’s political class has “gone completely bonkers in their response to climate change alarmism and hadn’t taken the time to actually read and understand the science”. He added ‘I can’t imagine what suicidal instincts reside in Australia’s political class.’ ‘In asking me to comment on the Australian response, you are asking the wrong person. You need to speak to someone specializing in abnormal psychology.’

Lindzen presumably refers to the Federal government’s response to the conclusion drawn from the IPCC report that coal use will need to be phased-out by 2050 and that there is a risk the Great Barrier Reef will disappear. Astonishingly, the main response to such possible important changes for Australia by Prime Minister Morrison is only that the report is “not binding” while Environment Minister Price only says it is “not policy prescriptive”. In fact, by drawing on Lindzen the opportunity exists for the Morrison government to take advantage of the serious deficiencies in the IPCC report and modify existing climate change  policies including by withdrawing from the non-binding Paris Agreement. Labor’s emphasis on renewables can be dismissed by Lindzen’s conclusion of an “obvious need for something more plausible to ‘sustain’ the renewables bubble.”

The report of Lindzen’s address is short and worth reading in full (see Lindzen Slams IPCC Report). The reporter identifies the following as the main points

• Great Barrier Reef is ‘not at risk from climate change’ says professor – as he claims global warming ENDED 20 years ago
• Warming of any significance ceased about 20 years ago, renewables a ‘bubble’
• Man-made global warming ‘does not appear to be a serious problem’
• Landscape will be degraded by rusting wind farms, decaying solar panel arrays
• Australia’s Barrier Reef ‘not in any danger’ and recovers from bleaching events

The government should invite Lindzen to Australia to make addresses in capital cities and a presentation to Cabinet.

PS I note that Australia’s Chief Scientist, Alan Finkel, who was appointed by Turnbull when PM, is reported as saying that he doesn’t necessarily agree with the phasing out of coal power by 2050 but does agree with the target of reducing emissions by 26 per cent by 2030. In fact he appears to advocate economy wide emissions and the “science” behind the IPCC report. Finkel has no academic background in meteorology and assessments of climate change whereas Lindzen has written more than 200 papers on them.