The Irish Climate Science Forum has published an elegant (and graphic filled) 36 page white paper that provides a dynamite overview of many of the most important skeptical climate science arguments. I have posted an annotated link to it on my Climate Change Debate Education website here: http://ccdedu.blogspot.com/2019/10/an-irish-overview-of-latest-climate.html

The title is “Overview of the Latest Climate Science for Policymakers” because it was prepared as input to an Irish government inquiry. It is also a great reference document for educational uses. It could even be used as a textbook.

For that matter, if I had the resources I would send a copy to every journalist that writes about climate change and every politician that pontificates about it. I encourage our readers to do just that.

Here is part of their introduction: “This paper provides a brief overview of the latest Climate Science, compiled by the ICSF for the information of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Climate Action and of the Draft National Energy and Climate Plan (NECP), 20212030. It is a summary compilation of the latest climate research and observations by independent scientists worldwide. The summary does not claim to be scientifically rigorous in every aspect, but hopefully encapsulates the key facts in this rapidlyevolving field. The latest research and observations indicate that while there is an anthropogenic GreenHouse Gas (GHG) influence, it is considerably less than depicted by the IPCC. Much more is also now understood about solar and other natural influences, weather events and many physical observations. Objective analysis of the facts points to prudent mitigation action but does not indicate a looming climate crisis.”

Many of the major issues are touched on, from paleoclimate and hot models to floods and global greening. The treatment is data intensive and the numerous graphs are excellent. There are also over 100 references.

There are five primary sections, but each section contains a number of subsections, each of which is a separate argument backed with its own data. For example, the first section is “Evidence that the IPCC Models are ‘Overheated’”, which has six separate subsections.

The second section is “Climate Observations do not indicate a Planetary Crisis.” In this case there are five independent subsections, but the last — “Recent “Extreme” Weather Events are not unprecedented, nor is there a proven link with anthropogenic GHG emissions”– has an additional seven subsubsections. These deal with the different sorts of supposedly extreme events, such as fires, droughts and floods. Again, each is backed with data.

The three remaining sections are these:

“Understanding Solar and other Natural Influences”

“Lessons from Paleoclimate, recent Millennia and Centuries”

“Increasing CO2 Levels are beneficial to Greening of the Planet”

I have probably seen most of this data before, a piece here and a piece there, but never collected together into a comprehensive set of strong arguments against climate alarmism. This overview is a remarkable piece of hard work. Jim O’Brian is the honcho and I understand a second addition is in the works. Bring it on.

All told there are 24 separate sections. Each is an independent, data driven argument against alarmism. If anyone is looking for proof that the science is not settled, this is it. In fact it makes a powerful statement for skepticism. There are other outstanding arguments but these 24 are enough to make the case, and them some.

Each of these 24 subsections is what I call a “gate breaker.” A gate breaker is a concise statement of a skeptical position that can be used to challenge a gatekeeping alarmist. There are many examples of gatekeeping, because denying the existence of serious skepticism is a common alarmist strategy. A gatekeeper might be a teacher, journalist, politician, activist, or just someone who refuses to listen. There are several other gate breakers on the Climate Change Debate Education website: http://ccdedu.blogspot.com

The Irish overview of skeptical climate science is a major advance in the battle for truth.

 I encourage our readers to do just that.

Author

  • David Wojick, Ph.D. is an independent analyst working at the intersection of science, technology and policy. For origins see http://www.stemed.info/engineer_tackles_confusion.html For over 100 prior articles for CFACT see http://www.cfact.org/author/david-wojick-ph-d/ Available for confidential research and consulting.