The UN IPCC is starting to see the light the crazy science-hating deniers have seen from the beginning, The only surprise here is that they’re actually admitting it.
(Telegraph) — A cold Arctic summer has led to a record increase in the ice cap, leading experts to predict a period of global cooling.
[…]
There has been a 60 per cent increase in the amount of ocean covered with ice compared to this time last year, they equivalent of almost a million square miles.
In a rebound from 2012’s record low an unbroken ice sheet more than half the size of Europe already stretches from the Canadian islands to Russia’s northern shores, days before the annual re-freeze is even set to begin.
The Northwest Passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific has remained blocked by pack-ice all year, forcing some ships to change their routes.
A leaked report to the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) seen by the Mail on Sunday, has led some scientists to claim that the world is heading for a period of cooling that will not end until the middle of this century.
If correct, it would contradict computer forecasts of imminent catastrophic warming. The news comes several years after the BBC predicted that the arctic would be ice-free by 2013.Despite the original forecasts, major climate research centres now accept that there has been a “pause” in global warming since 1997.
The original predictions led to billions being invested in green measures to combat the effects of climate change.
Here’s a few posts I’ve penned on the subject. Note the comments from the climate activists.
- Global warming doomsday predictions not panning out
- What do we do about the out of control warming?
- Oops… Climate “Scientists” wrong again
- The danger of scientific consensus
Sifting Reality 
My comment is that cooling periods are nothing new. See this temperature plot:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/
The longer term trend is upward. If you don’t understand the basic argument about CO2 in the atmosphere, then I would suggest you need to understand that. I dare say that your attitude about global warming is not based on reading or data, but based on political belief.
I am not surprised if the models did not predict this cooling period accurately. The models may not be good enough to do that, meaning the scientific understanding is limited. The models simply reflect what is known.
The argument about CO2 as a greenhouse gas is very basic. That does mean it is easy to predict the exact trajectory of climate. However, to ignore the basic physics is not prudent.
I’ll issue this challenge again: call your friends in the Navy and tell them to remove CO2 from their weather models. See what happens to the temperature of the atmosphere. Do you think the Navy models of weather, meant to protect our troops and save lives, are also part of the hoax? The physics is very basic: CO2 has an impact on atmospheric temperature. If you were to remove it from the Earth’s atmosphere, the Earth’s atmosphere would cool (all other things being equal). But predicting the exact trajectory of climate change is very difficult. We need more understanding of God’s creation, not less.
It has already been shown that co2 levels and temp dont always correlate. And it can be argued that high temps cause elevated co2, not the other way around.
You admit that “scientific understanding” is limited, yet there’s no room to question the veracity of anthropological climate change?
Yes, scientific understanding is limited. There is certainly room to question the veracity of anthropogenic climate change. In fact, as documented by the IPCC, the models that predict warming have a spread. They don’t all predict the same degree of warming. That spread is a reflection of uncertainty.
My read of these comments is not that they address the uncertainty. I interpret your statements to mean there is a certainty that man-made climate change will not occur. Or at least there is no scientific basis for claiming that man-made climate change might occur. Isn’t that what you are saying? You are saying man-made climate change is “junk science”. The idea was invented to get more funding. The scientists who work on this topic know it is a fiction and work on it only to get more funding, not to increase scientific knowledge. If I misunderstand your statements, please correct me.
No, the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has not “admitted” anything of the sort.
Thank you magnus for that detailed rebuttal.