At the New York Times's "Dot Earth" blog, Andrew Revkin reports that "the science on a connection between hurricanes and global warming is going in the opposite direction" — as in, the evidence that the connection between human-caused global warming (overgenerously assuming that there is any) and hurricane intensity or frequency of "heavy precipitations events," as shown in a "snapshot" of a draft of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's upcoming report, is one of "low confidence."
Fine, as in "It's about time." But at the bottom of that same graphic are findings relating to sea levels which appear to be laugh-out-loud funny.
At a larger version of the graphic, this is what we find:
Okay, so the "increased incidence and/or magnitude of high sea levels," apparently evaluated as "likely" since 1970, is currently "not assessed." Yet serious sea level rises are still considered "likely," as in "more likely than not."
IPCC defenders may argue that, as the document presented is a draft, this area hasn't been finalized. If so, why does the conclusion appear to be predetermined even when it hasn't been formally assessed? (Yes, there is a tiny footnote by "likely" and "more likely than not." Revkin is the one who should have seen it, and explained it. Along those lines, he does write that "it’s rare to see substantive changes this late in the game.")
Revkin still takes rising sea levels as a serious problem as a given:
... rising seas will make any storm surge worse. That’s about it in terms of making the case that tropical cyclone danger is rising in a human-heated world. The climate panel foresees fewer hurricanes, overall, but a rise in strength in those that do form. In the meantime, statistical analysis by federal climate scientists points to a decline in the number of hurricanes making landfall in the United States since the mid 1800s.
Sea levels have been rising at a rate of 6.7 inches per century, or one inch every 15 years. But "over the past 7 years from 2005-2012" the rise has been "less than 5 inches/century." Yet they somehow "know" that humans are causing this, even though the worldwide production of greenhouse gases, thanks primarily to China and India, has been increasing every year.
So we're supposed to create a labyrinthine carbon-tax regime which would bring the world's economy to a halt (in those places which decided to comply, which the U.S. in its foolishness would probably do unilaterally) over sea levels when their rise is slowing. Sure.
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.
