p. 438: The IPCC has essentially ignored the role of natural climate variability. In reality the various IPCC WG1 reports have chapters entitled: 7: Observed Climate ariations and Change (1990); 3: Observed Climate ariability and Change (1996); 2: Observed Climate ariability and Change (2001); 6: Paleoclimate (2007).
p. 439: referring to the 2001 report the report of the IPCC claimed that, based on computer model simulations, climate has only limited variability and hence was not dynamic, non-linear and chaotic. ctual words [page 95, WG1 report, T R] are: Since the pio- neering work of Lorenz in the 1960s, it is well known that complex non-linear systems have limited predictabilit , even though the mathematical equations defining the time evo- lution of the system are perfectly deterministic. The climate system is, as we have seen such a system ....
p. 439: In discussing the role of chaos: Five simulations were undertaken for the period 1860–2000 using the same general circulations models that are used by the IPCC. Each simulation had slightly different initial conditions, but otherwise was the same. ery small differences in the initial conditions of climate resulted in large differences in large variations in later climate.2178 This has minor misrepresentations: there was only one model, and the initial conditions were different weather ‘snapshots’ from a control run with only internal climate variability26. The serious misrepresentation is that of large differences in later climate. There were, as expected, large differences in subsequent weather variations, but the later climates (i.e. multi-decadal averages and trends) were
113. p. 443 [footnote 2181]: repeats Monckton’s claims about n Inconvenient ruth without
mentioning that most were rejected by the court.27
More precisely, what the judgment28
says of the plaintiff’s counsel is that Mr. Downes produced a long schedule of such alleged errors and waxed lyrical in that regard. and later: In the event I was persuaded that only some of them were sufficiently persuasive to be relevant for the purposes of his argument, and it was those matters — 9 in all — upon which I invented Mr Chamberlain29 to concentrate. There-after, the judgement uses quotation marks around the word “errors”.
114. p. 450: There was a statistical study to show that the 20th century was unusually warm2185 ... and .. another paper showing that appropriate tests that link climate proxy records to the observational data were not utilised and, as a result, the unusual warmth of the 20th century disappeared2186. What reference 2186 actually says is that the significance of the 20th-century warming anomaly disappears. — the change is not in the 20th century warming but rather in the level of statistical significance (95% rather than over 99% as suggested in reference 2185).
and as always, the false claim that the IPCC ‘uses’ the models The first sentence of this item was included as a contribution from Tim Lambert and temporarily dropped until
I had time to expand on the word ‘rejected’. vailable from http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/ dmin/2007/2288.html. 2.1 had the URL incorrectly. 28
s noted previously, version
29For the defence.