3 ms·

You're misrepresenting what GP said. They didn't say "experts", they said: > all the people who have made confident predictions over the years regarding global

You're misrepresenting what GP said. They didn't say "experts", they said: > all the people who have made confident predictions over the years regarding global warming. You can't deny that most of the people speaking publicly, and by far the loudest people, are not experts, they are politicians, journalists, and filmmakers. (And tech entrepreneurs...) Many of those have predicted disasters that never happened. But judging by the downvotes, I guess that's an inconvenient truth.

bad_user 7y ago
No, it is the scientists that have predicted the disaster, with an overwhelming consensus, hence the downvotes.
- leereeves 7y ago
  No, journalists and politicians are misrepresenting what the IPCC says. The IPCC are not alarmists, and they aren't predicting "The world is going to end in 12 years." The actual report is far more balanced. Yes, they are predicting some negative consequences, alongside potential benefits and measures for adapation and mitigation. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ar5_wgII_spm_en.pdf https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ar5_wgII_spm...
  - pdonis 7y ago
    > journalists and politicians are misrepresenting what the IPCC says. And the IPCC Summary for Policymakers itself misrepresents what the actual science says. All of the caveats, disclaimers, hedges, and so forth in the scientific working group reports (and even more so the caveats, disclaimers, hedges, etc. in the actual peer-reviewed papers on which the working group reports are based) are ignored in the Summary for Policymakers. The policy recommendations are already determined and published before the scientific working group reports are released. So there are actually three levels of misrepresentation involved: first the IPCC WG reports misrepresent the actual primary sources; then the IPCC SPM misrepresents the WG reports; then journalists and politicians misrepresent the IPCC SPM. At each stage the predictions get more alarmist and the recommendations get more draconian.
  - nl 7y ago
    Why would you link to the fifth edition of the report instead of the (complete) sixth edition or the in progress work now?[1] Of course the IPCC doesn't predict the world is going to end in 12 years. That's a strawman - I'm sure you can find someone who has predicted the world will end in 12 years, but that isn't the disaster people are concerned about. Instead, they collect five key "reasons for concern" by "using the following specific criteria: large magnitude, high probability, or irreversibility of impacts; timing of impacts; persistent vulnerability or exposure contributing to risks; or limited potential to reduce risks through adaptation or mitigation." [2] Some of the risks associated with these include: Risk of death, injury, ill-health, or disrupted livelihoods in low-lying coastal zones and small island developing states and other smallislands, due to storm surges, coastal flooding, and sea level rise. ... Risk of food insecurity and the breakdown of food systems linked to warming, drought, flooding, and precipitation variability and extremes,particularly for poorer populations in urban and rural settings. [1] https://www.ipcc.ch/reports/ https://www.ipcc.ch/reports/ (click "Assessment Reports") [2] Pg 12, https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ar5_wgII_spm_en.pdf https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ar5_wgII_spm...
    - leereeves 7y ago
      I don't think the sixth edition of the assessment report is complete. It's "AR6 Climate Change 2021" so I assume it will be released next year. But if it's available somewhere, let me know. "The world is going to end in 12 years..." is a recent famous quote by a prominent Democrat. I'm surprised you haven't heard it. Personally, I bought into the climate alarmism about 30 years ago, and my skepticism is based on seeing so many things I've heard and read (even from scientists) turn out to be exaggerated.
      - moultano 7y ago
        >The world is going to end in 12 years..." " is a recent famous quote by a prominent Democrat. This isn't true, and you should probably cut whatever source told it to you out of your life. The world is going to end if we don't take action within 12 years, which is the gist of what the IPCC report says.
- pdonis 7y ago
  > it is the scientists that have predicted the disaster, with an overwhelming consensus No, they haven't. The IPCC reports are political documents, not scientific documents. One key fact that shows this: the Summary for Policymakers is written and published before any of the Working Group reports, and the Working Group reports then have to be edited and massaged to be consistent with what the Summary for Policymakers says. A true scientific report with scientific predictions would be the other way around: first you would write, review, and publish the scientific analysis and predictions, and then you would write, review, and publish the policy recommendations.

bad_user 7y ago

No, it is the scientists that have predicted the disaster, with an overwhelming consensus, hence the downvotes.

leereeves 7y ago
No, journalists and politicians are misrepresenting what the IPCC says. The IPCC are not alarmists, and they aren't predicting "The world is going to end in 12 years." The actual report is far more balanced. Yes, they are predicting some negative consequences, alongside potential benefits and measures for adapation and mitigation. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ar5_wgII_spm_en.pdf https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ar5_wgII_spm...
- pdonis 7y ago
  > journalists and politicians are misrepresenting what the IPCC says. And the IPCC Summary for Policymakers itself misrepresents what the actual science says. All of the caveats, disclaimers, hedges, and so forth in the scientific working group reports (and even more so the caveats, disclaimers, hedges, etc. in the actual peer-reviewed papers on which the working group reports are based) are ignored in the Summary for Policymakers. The policy recommendations are already determined and published before the scientific working group reports are released. So there are actually three levels of misrepresentation involved: first the IPCC WG reports misrepresent the actual primary sources; then the IPCC SPM misrepresents the WG reports; then journalists and politicians misrepresent the IPCC SPM. At each stage the predictions get more alarmist and the recommendations get more draconian.
- nl 7y ago
  Why would you link to the fifth edition of the report instead of the (complete) sixth edition or the in progress work now?[1] Of course the IPCC doesn't predict the world is going to end in 12 years. That's a strawman - I'm sure you can find someone who has predicted the world will end in 12 years, but that isn't the disaster people are concerned about. Instead, they collect five key "reasons for concern" by "using the following specific criteria: large magnitude, high probability, or irreversibility of impacts; timing of impacts; persistent vulnerability or exposure contributing to risks; or limited potential to reduce risks through adaptation or mitigation." [2] Some of the risks associated with these include: Risk of death, injury, ill-health, or disrupted livelihoods in low-lying coastal zones and small island developing states and other smallislands, due to storm surges, coastal flooding, and sea level rise. ... Risk of food insecurity and the breakdown of food systems linked to warming, drought, flooding, and precipitation variability and extremes,particularly for poorer populations in urban and rural settings. [1] https://www.ipcc.ch/reports/ https://www.ipcc.ch/reports/ (click "Assessment Reports") [2] Pg 12, https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ar5_wgII_spm_en.pdf https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ar5_wgII_spm...
  - leereeves 7y ago
    I don't think the sixth edition of the assessment report is complete. It's "AR6 Climate Change 2021" so I assume it will be released next year. But if it's available somewhere, let me know. "The world is going to end in 12 years..." is a recent famous quote by a prominent Democrat. I'm surprised you haven't heard it. Personally, I bought into the climate alarmism about 30 years ago, and my skepticism is based on seeing so many things I've heard and read (even from scientists) turn out to be exaggerated.
    - moultano 7y ago
      >The world is going to end in 12 years..." " is a recent famous quote by a prominent Democrat. This isn't true, and you should probably cut whatever source told it to you out of your life. The world is going to end if we don't take action within 12 years, which is the gist of what the IPCC report says.
pdonis 7y ago
> it is the scientists that have predicted the disaster, with an overwhelming consensus No, they haven't. The IPCC reports are political documents, not scientific documents. One key fact that shows this: the Summary for Policymakers is written and published before any of the Working Group reports, and the Working Group reports then have to be edited and massaged to be consistent with what the Summary for Policymakers says. A true scientific report with scientific predictions would be the other way around: first you would write, review, and publish the scientific analysis and predictions, and then you would write, review, and publish the policy recommendations.