The IPCC report will emphasize imminent and dire risk to the global climate system.
It's pointless to make recommendations, the fools will ignore everything, retreat into their caves and live in denial.
I wonder when they're going to come clean and just admit they're incapable of accurately predicting future extreme weather and climate catastrophe, since that's certainly been their performance of record. It's just too complicated for them. They can handle little bits and pieces of various phenomena, but just let more than one come together and they're completely surprised.
The one thing IPCC has done consistently is to significantly underestimate the most important effects and the time scales of global warming.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/aug/08/worlds-climate-scientists-to-issue-stark-warning-over-global-heating-threat

On Sun, 8 Aug 2021 12:56:50 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
<bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:

>The IPCC report will emphasize imminent and dire risk to the global climate system.
>It's pointless to make recommendations, the fools will ignore everything, retreat into their caves and live in denial.
>I wonder when they're going to come clean and just admit they're incapable of accurately predicting future extreme weather and climate catastrophe, since that's certainly been their performance of record. It's just too complicated for them. They can handle little bits and pieces of various phenomena, but just let more than one come together and they're completely surprised.
>The one thing IPCC has done consistently is to significantly underestimate the most important effects and the time scales of global warming.
>
>https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/aug/08/worlds-climate-scientists-to-issue-stark-warning-over-global-heating-threat

Bored with the virus, the guardian has to go back to global warming,
unless a good war comes along or something.

Is "global heating" different from "global warming" ?

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

The best designs are necessarily accidental.

On Sunday, August 8, 2021 at 5:02:33 PM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Aug 2021 12:56:50 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
> <bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >The IPCC report will emphasize imminent and dire risk to the global climate system.
> >It's pointless to make recommendations, the fools will ignore everything, retreat into their caves and live in denial.
> >I wonder when they're going to come clean and just admit they're incapable of accurately predicting future extreme weather and climate catastrophe, since that's certainly been their performance of record. It's just too complicated for them. They can handle little bits and pieces of various phenomena, but just let more than one come together and they're completely surprised.
> >The one thing IPCC has done consistently is to significantly underestimate the most important effects and the time scales of global warming.
> >
> >https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/aug/08/worlds-climate-scientists-to-issue-stark-warning-over-global-heating-threat
> Bored with the virus, the guardian has to go back to global warming,
> unless a good war comes along or something.

They should be switching to the slaughter in Afghanistan before long, another bang up total US failure.

>
> Is "global heating" different from "global warming" ?

Maybe heating is the preferred term in UK.

>
>
>
> --
>
> John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
>
> The best designs are necessarily accidental.

On Sunday, August 8, 2021 at 2:02:33 PM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

> Is "global heating" different from "global warming" ?

Yes, of course; heating is cause, warming is effect.

On Monday, August 9, 2021 at 5:56:54 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> The IPCC report will emphasize imminent and dire risk to the global climate system.
> It's pointless to make recommendations, the fools will ignore everything, retreat into their caves and live in denial.
> I wonder when they're going to come clean and just admit they're incapable of accurately predicting future extreme weather and climate catastrophe, since that's certainly been their performance of record. It's just too complicated for them. They can handle little bits and pieces of various phenomena, but just let more than one come together and they're completely surprised.
> The one thing IPCC has done consistently is to significantly underestimate the most important effects and the time scales of global warming.
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/aug/08/worlds-climate-scientists-to-issue-stark-warning-over-global-heating-threat

The IPCC was put together by politicians to deliver a simplified version of scientific opinion that the politicians could understand an act on.

As James Hansen has pointed out - in relation to sea level rise - this precludes reporting on things that might happen, even if there is quite a high probability that they will.

Weather is chaotic, so predicting specific extreme weather events isn't a option. Pointing out that they are becoming increasingly likely is confused with alarmism by people like John Larkin, and quite a few politicians are just as silly as he is.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Sunday, August 8, 2021 at 10:42:24 PM UTC-4, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> On Monday, August 9, 2021 at 5:56:54 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > The IPCC report will emphasize imminent and dire risk to the global climate system.
> > It's pointless to make recommendations, the fools will ignore everything, retreat into their caves and live in denial.
> > I wonder when they're going to come clean and just admit they're incapable of accurately predicting future extreme weather and climate catastrophe, since that's certainly been their performance of record. It's just too complicated for them. They can handle little bits and pieces of various phenomena, but just let more than one come together and they're completely surprised.
> > The one thing IPCC has done consistently is to significantly underestimate the most important effects and the time scales of global warming.
> >
> > https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/aug/08/worlds-climate-scientists-to-issue-stark-warning-over-global-heating-threat
> The IPCC was put together by politicians to deliver a simplified version of scientific opinion that the politicians could understand an act on.
>
> As James Hansen has pointed out - in relation to sea level rise - this precludes reporting on things that might happen, even if there is quite a high probability that they will.
>
> Weather is chaotic, so predicting specific extreme weather events isn't a option. Pointing out that they are becoming increasingly likely is confused with alarmism by people like John Larkin, and quite a few politicians are just as silly as he is.

Whereas in the past they would talk about time remaining to avert catastrophe, they now acknowledge that catastrophe is unavoidable. and here, regardless of what we do, and there is short time window to avoid making it worse.

"Some devastating impacts of global warming are now unavoidable, a major new scientific report finds. But there is still a short window to stop things from getting even worse."

The IPCC is an underestimate from every angle, things are much worse than they know.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/09/climate/climate-change-report-ipcc-un.html

>
> --
> Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Monday, August 9, 2021 at 11:10:02 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> On Sunday, August 8, 2021 at 10:42:24 PM UTC-4, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > On Monday, August 9, 2021 at 5:56:54 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > The IPCC report will emphasize imminent and dire risk to the global climate system.
> > > It's pointless to make recommendations, the fools will ignore everything, retreat into their caves and live in denial.
> > > I wonder when they're going to come clean and just admit they're incapable of accurately predicting future extreme weather and climate catastrophe, since that's certainly been their performance of record. It's just too complicated for them. They can handle little bits and pieces of various phenomena, but just let more than one come together and they're completely surprised.
> > > The one thing IPCC has done consistently is to significantly underestimate the most important effects and the time scales of global warming.
> > >
> > > https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/aug/08/worlds-climate-scientists-to-issue-stark-warning-over-global-heating-threat
> >
> > The IPCC was put together by politicians to deliver a simplified version of scientific opinion that the politicians could understand an act on.
> >
> > As James Hansen has pointed out - in relation to sea level rise - this precludes reporting on things that might happen, even if there is quite a high probability that they will.
> >
> > Weather is chaotic, so predicting specific extreme weather events isn't a option. Pointing out that they are becoming increasingly likely is confused with alarmism by people like John Larkin, and quite a few politicians are just as silly as he is.
> >
> Whereas in the past they would talk about time remaining to avert catastrophe, they now acknowledge that catastrophe is unavoidable. and here, regardless of what we do, and there is short time window to avoid making it worse.
>
> "Some devastating impacts of global warming are now unavoidable, a major new scientific report finds. But there is still a short window to stop things from getting even worse."
>
> The IPCC is an underestimate from every angle, things are much worse than they know.
>
> https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/09/climate/climate-change-report-ipcc-un.html

So we should throw out the IPCC, and rely on Fred Bloggs. He's bound to be taken seriously, even if the IPCC isn't taken seriously enough.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney