Summary of Andy May: Is AR6 the worst and most biased IPCC report? | Tom Nelson Pod #105

00:00:00 - 00:25:00

Andy May discusses the flaws in climate models and the biased nature of the latest IPCC report in this video. He argues that the models do not account for natural variability and that natural climate change is much larger than initially thought. May also mentions the flaws in the AR6 report, which claims that all warming since the 19th century is due to humans, despite being statistically invalidated when including human greenhouse gas emissions. He suggests that the comments to the IPCC reports should be made public for transparency and that the IPCC needs to reform or give up.

• 00:00:00 In this section, Andy May discusses previous IPCC reports - FAR, SAR, and TAR - and their accuracy, bias, and flaws. He mentions that the statement in the FAR report from 1992, which predicted a 0.3 to 0.6 degrees Celsius increase in surface air temperature over the last 100 years, was mostly accurate and well within the natural climate variability, according to historical records of glacier advances and retreats. He also noted that political representatives made last-minute changes in Chapter 8 of the SAR report, which led to a "major deception" in the peer-review process, according to scientific community reactions. Similarly, the TAR report was seriously tainted by the controversial hockey stick graph, which was later shown to be flawed due to major statistical errors and the inclusion of flawed data.
• 00:05:00 In this section, the speaker discusses the previous IPCC reports, such as AR4 and AR5, and how they have faced criticism due to bias and flawed models. The AR6 report also faces criticism as it claims all warming since the 19th century is due to humans, despite the models being statistically invalidated when including human greenhouse gas emissions. Additionally, the coupled ocean atmosphere models used to produce higher sea surface temperatures than observed, and the IPCC CMIP climate models have trouble modeling clouds.
• 00:10:00 In this section, the transcript discusses the AR6 report's modeling of climate sensitivity. The report notes that the models have a higher mean climate sensitivity to greenhouse gases than the previous CMIP5 models and a broader range of ECS and TCR values. However, recent efforts to reduce bias in the models' cloud feedbacks have led some models to produce a wider range of future warming projections than the assessed range. The models' inability to accurately predict sea surface temperatures and the pattern of warming and cooling oceans is a sign they are missing a vital component of climate. The authors suggest that the models are invalidating observation-based calculations of climate sensitivity by hypothesizing a continuously changing climate state that is unfalsifiable.
• 00:15:00 In this section, it is argued that AR6 is the worst and most biased IPCC report, with its flaws stemming from political influence on the selection of scientists who write the reports. The report claims that the last decade was the warmest in 125,000 years, but the data used to support this claim only has 10-decade resolution up to 2,000 years ago, making it unreliable. Despite publishing six major reports totaling 6,543 pages, the public still remains unconvinced about the importance of climate change, with recent polls suggesting increased skepticism about human-caused climate change. It is suggested that the IPCC needs to reform or give up.
• 00:20:00 In this section, scientist Andy May discusses the flaws in climate models and the biased nature of the latest IPCC report. He explains how the models do not account for natural variability, specifically the ocean oscillations, which were discovered after the CO2 hypothesis was created. May argues that natural climate change is much larger than initially thought, and all the evidence since 1990 suggests it. He mentions that the AR-6 report increased cloud feedback from AR5, resulting in a 20% higher projected warming, moving them further away from observations. May also talks about the uncertainty surrounding the cloud feedback's positive or negative impact due to high and low-level clouds' complexities. Finally, he mentions that there was disagreement within the team regarding chapter seven's climate sensitivity, and an appendix was added to show alternate views.
• 00:25:00 In this section, climate scientist Andy May discusses the differences in opinion among scientists regarding the causes of global warming. While some scientists believe that carbon dioxide caused most of the warming, others think that natural variability, such as changes in the Sun, is just as important. May notes that while there is agreement that the AR-6 report by the IPCC is too hot, half of the scientists think CO2 caused most of the warming, while the other half believes otherwise. May also shares his thoughts on the future of the IPCC, saying that while he thinks it's a waste of money, governments will probably continue to fund them. He suggests that the comments to the IPCC reports should be made publicly available for transparency.