The Decade When Global Warming Tipped Into ‘Climate Crisis’
In the final days of 2019, there is much to reflect upon events of the past year and, with the closing of the second decade of the 21st century, much to reflect upon how climate change alarmism has itself alarmingly morphed into something much more dangerous, visceral, urgent, ideologically driven and immediate as regards public perception and societal impact.
A decade during which global warming faded into obscurity (on account of the fact that there wasn’t any from 1998-2013) to be replaced almost universally by the more politically correct term of ‘climate change’, which has itself now been largely displaced in activist circles and the media by the terms ‘climate emergency’ and ‘climate crisis’.
Ironically so, because, bereft of an actual climate crisis, alarmist scientists and activists have proceeded to invent one, linguistically, as in the case of the Guardian’s newly introduced style guide and by co-opting extreme weather events and their impacts into the general narrative.
In the absence also of any observably catastrophic global rise in temperature throughout the 21st century (which not even ‘pause-busting’ adjustments to temperature data could conjure up), alarmists have turned to inventing imminent future catastrophes via the invocation of highly speculative ‘tipping points’ which supposedly will be ‘triggered’ at imaginary and entirely ad hoc global warming thresholds (1.5C, 2C, 3C, etc. relative to pre-industrial baseline).
They have also increasingly employed the highly unrealistic ‘business as usual’ scenario RCP8.5 to supercharge their global warming projections in order to manufacture climate alarmist narratives in the media, a strategy which only in the last couple of months has started to be seriously questioned.
Roger Pielke Jr has recently been at the vanguard of the movement to expose the misuse of this nightmarishly unrealistic scenario as ‘business as usual’:
The decade started off with the climate science community desperately trying to salvage some shred of credibility from the fallout of climategate.
In the event, they never managed – they just airbrushed over the warts and manufactured official-looking false exonerations of their appalling behavior, bordering on scientific fraud in some cases.
Having done this, they carried on regardless – ‘business as usual’ you might say. With the RCP8.5 debacle, due to be now carried over (with interest) into the ‘new, improved’ SSP/CMIP6 fantasy couplings, one can see that nothing has changed.
Bad practice and dodgy science are still rewarded with lavish grants if the message remains still that ‘It’s time to panic!’.
Judith Curry has written an excellent push back article to the lukewarm attempt by Wallace-Wells, among others, to dial down the alarmist hype in the light of the RCP8.5 criticisms, whilst still maintaining the necessary ‘scary’ projections of future warming.
Read more at Climate Scepticism
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Trackback from your site.
Andy Rowlands
| #
2019, the year in which climate hysteria was ramped up to new heights of absurdity. Don’t look for it to stop anytime soon.
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Andy,
Maybe I should, but I do not know where you live. But in the USA we have a President who whose theme is to make the USA greater again. And, if one has eyes and uses them, it is easy to ‘see’ that a previous trend has been reversed. But our (your and mine) problem it very difficult to directly have a conversation with him so we can tell him, a non-scientist, that first wrong ideas of Science can be absolutely refuted by simple observations. Somehow we need to have this conversation with him. or with his advisers whom he trusts There have been two wrong scientific ideas for more than a century–the idea of Darwin’s evolution and the idea of Arrhenius’s greenhouse effect. That birds must intuitively incubate the eggs that female birds lay to reproduce their kind is an observation which cannot be questioned. It is a commonly observed fact that the air’s temperature has never be observed to be lower the air’s dewpoint temperature is another observation which can not be questioned.
So we (you and I and others of like-mind) need to concentrate our efforts outside PSI, which is important for without PSI we would not be having this conversation, to get the message to the man who has demonstrated that he can change things with the help of others of like-mind.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Andy Rowlands
| #
Hi Jerry, I’m across the Pond in Blighty, so there’s even less chance of me being ablt to tell Trump anything 🙂 I regularly share articles on here to Faceache and post a lot of stuff on my profile, to try and educate the masses as to what’s really going on. It’s just gone 9.15pm here, so I’ll wish you a Happy New Year 🙂
Reply