New Paper on Climate Change

I publicly became a Climate  Sceptic in June 2011.   It was then I discovered that Carbon Dioxide (CO2) was only 0.04% of the world’s atmosphere.  I agree that climate change is always happening but I can’t believe that CO2 is the main driver.

I believe the main driver of CC is the sun.  It is 333,000 times the earth’s mass and is only 8 light-minutes away.  Our nearest star is 4.5 light years.  The mass and nearness of the Sun dominate the movement and intensity of climate change.

A recent paper has dramatically reset thinking about climate change.   The follow comments are a rehash pf a recent article in The Australian: Being a climate activist – whether scientist or journalist – means never having to say you’re sorry.  Chris Mitchell (8 June 2026).

Several months  ago a new scientific paper that challenges the  worst-case scenarios on possible future climate change, and dramatically cuts the forecast warming of the planet by the end of this century was widely reported in the world’s media.

Incredibly, more than five weeks after the new recommended scenarios were accepted by the IPCC, most climate writers and government-backed climate bodies in Australia have not even mentioned the changes, which eliminate the doomsday scenarios many climate activists have been pushing for decades.

The truth is that most people who closely follow the arcane world of the IPCC and its feed-in science groups knew the extreme warming scenarios were always a fantasy and that climate science has allowed itself to be hijacked by what has resembled a death cult of catastrophe.

The so-called business-as-usual scenario, RCP 8.5, involved an eight-fold increase in coal burning for power, which at the time the pathway was accepted was five times proven global coal reserves.  There was no mentions in this scenario of the increase in gas globally as a cheaper, less carbon-intensive source of power than coal, especially after the rise of fracking for shale gas in the US in the early 2000s.  The scenario was based on the population increasing from the present eight billion to 12 billion by 2100. It now seems global population will hit 10 billion mid-century and fall to as low as seven to nine billion by 2100.

Most scaremongering by global warming catastrophists such as King Charles, Greta Thunberg and our own Energy Minister Chris Bowen was built on predictions drawn from RCP8.5. This includes predicted sea level rises of 1.1m and a rise in average global temperatures by 5C by 2100. Results from the latest scenario modelling suggest about 2.5C of warming since pre-industrial times.  One commentator said that the  high emission levels (quantified by SSP5-8.5) have become implausible.  Note SSP5-8.5 generated more than half of the references in the 2018 IPCC US Fourth National Climate Assessment.

The new pathways put forward by the scientific paper will feed into the upcoming Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change AR7 assessment, due in stages by 2029.

Australian alarmist climate writers have for years made overheated forecasts in their news and opinion pages; . Now with this new paper being published  there has been no comment whatsoever.

The reality is that despite massive investments in renewables over the past 30 years fossil fuels still dominate global power, and emissions of CO2 from those fossil fuels are still rising globally.

Some interesting facts about CO2:

There are four Greenhouse Gases: Methane (0.5%), Nitrous Oxide (1%), CO2 (2.5%), water vapour (95%) Bracket figures are contribution to Global Warming.

The current percentage for CO2 is 0.04%  All plant life will die if the level drops to 0.02%,  Thankfully it has been rising (0.038 to 0.42) in the past 100 years.  Crop yields are increasing.

During the Carboniferous era when the massive coal seams were being created geologist believe the CO2 level was 0.14%.

The highest level of CO2 (0.8%) is believed to occurred in the Precambrian era.

Could reckless reporting of implausible worst-case scenarios by left-leaning journalists have contributed to climate scepticism? Asking that question would require left-leaning journalists to even admit those scenarios are implausible, which they seem in no rush to do.

The IPCC now needs to correct the record on climate scare campaigns, namely “sea level rise, hurricanes, implausible temperature rises,fires, dying polar bears and extreme weather events.