A Return to Bad Habits
The first thing to note about the linked paper entitled, “Extreme Weather the IPCC’s Changing Tune” is that it was written by physicist Dr. Ralph B. Alexander. Alexander is also the author of “Global Warming False Alarm and Science Under Attack: The Age of Unreason”.
Dr. Alexander’s curriculum vitae is as extensive as it is impressive and appears on the third page of the paper. Ironically, on the same page, is that the British Royal Society and the nation’s Met Office were invited to review the paper and submit a rejoinder for publication with the paper, but no reply was received.
To that, I say, “The tradition continues”.
It seems even the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) caves to political pressure. To that, I say, “What government entity remains partisan? That tradition also continues.”
Alexander reviews differing types of weather and its attribution in AR6 which is the Sixth Assessment Report of the IPCC. Prior to this paper, the organization maintained that global warming had not affected storms or their intensities in any manner. Surrendering under political pressure and that of the partisan legacy news, they appear to have suddenly changed course and counsel.
In 2011, Donna Laframboise, a Canadian writer, photographer, and feminist activist wrote a book entitled, “The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the World's Top Climate Expert”. In preparation for this book, Ms. Laframboise, and a team of examiners audited an IPCC climate assessment report. The IPCC, from its founding and furtherance, stated that it would only use peer-reviewed sources and references, yet the audit team found 5,587 pieces of non-peer-reviewed literature and the unmitigated and prejudicial involvement of several major environmental groups.
The IPCC did not challenge Laframboise’s findings. The review completely exposed the fallacies of the IPCC up to that point. Since then the organization has been better, and less partisan, but it appears that parts of it are beginning to weaken yet again.
Further, the IPCC was established on the premise that it would not be political in any manner, yet they immediately started producing a concluding section to each report called, “Summary for Policymakers”. While the organization continues to assert that there have been no increases in certain categories of weather, other events such as droughts, tropical cyclones, heat waves, and cold extremes they say have been affected yet as Alexander verifies, “cannot be justified by actual observations”.
The report is lengthy, yet, I would recommend reading, at minimum, the 12th chapter containing the “Conclusions”. Again and again, advocate science rears its biased head. This is all unequivocal attestation that the ability to misrepresent and extort science does have a price.
Everywhere we look today, anthropogenic climate change is being contradicted, nevertheless for political advantage, progressive governments the world over are making unwarranted policies that unnecessarily hurt, and often heinously, the average citizen. These same politicians coerce and compel findings of science in an effort to match and harmonize with their prejudicial political desires and quest for power.
They don't alter their views to fit the facts; they alter their facts to fit their views.