Drawbacks of Apriorism in Intergovernmental Climatology

Christopher Monckton
Additional contact information
Christopher Monckton: Science and Public Policy Institute, 5501 Merchants' View Square, #209, Haymarket, VA 20169 USA

Energy & Environment, 2014, vol. 25, issue 6-7, 1177-1204

Abstract: IPCC (2013) replaces climate models' over-predictions of near-term global warming with its “expert assessment†that warming in the next 30 years may scarcely exceed that of the last 30. Medium-term anthropogenic forcings and global temperature projections have been all but halved since 1990. There has been no global warming this millennium. Nevertheless, at the intergovernmental level, an aprioristic approach to modeling, over-confidence in models' predictive skill, and serial misrepresentation of results has prevented agreement on what fraction of recent warming was anthropogenic, how much warming we may cause and at what risk or net welfare loss, if any. The cost of mitigating predicted warming exceeds that of later adaptation by 1–2 orders of magnitude. Given governments' pre-existing monopsony of climatology, the question arises whether intergovernmental science is either necessary or desirable.

Keywords: IPCC; general circulation models; global warming; numerical forecasting (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2014
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1260/0958-305X.25.6-7.1177 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:engenv:v:25:y:2014:i:6-7:p:1177-1204

DOI: 10.1260/0958-305X.25.6-7.1177

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Energy & Environment
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().