Summarised by Centrist
A recent US Department of Energy report authored by five respected scientists challenges the decades-old claims underpinning ‘settled’ climate science and the political push for Net Zero emissions.
Despite its significance, mainstream outlets like the BBC and Guardian have largely ignored it.
The report states that climate models offer “little guidance” on how carbon dioxide affects the climate, finds no clear increase in extreme weather events, and notes no rising sea levels trend in North America. It also reveals that weather attribution science was initially designed to support legal actions (“lawfare”).
Lead critic Anthony Watts highlights the rare official backing this report has, praising its thorough critique of climate model errors and scientific uncertainties. The report includes evidence of widespread “greening” of the planet due to CO2 fertilisation, a fact often omitted from major IPCC reports.
It also rejects the widely used RCP8.5 emissions scenario, which assumes very high future emissions and is often called the “business as usual” case. The report says this scenario is unrealistic, but it is still regularly used in alarming climate studies and news reports.
With some climate models projecting three times as much warming as others, even after decades of development, the report suggests these models still lack the accuracy needed to support reliable policy decisions.
Finally, it questions the attribution of recent extreme weather to human activity, criticising World Weather Attribution’s controversial methods and the limited historical data available to substantiate such claims.
