I remember posting so many times about the model used against all other models, and a 3rd grader could tell you something was not right. All the models were clumped together except for the one used, which should have been a tell from day one.
The climate nazi’s are now admitting the model was flawed and continue on the trek. Someone needs to be held accountable, and most are scientists, woke ones willing to manipulate data to sell a lie. All the scientists who questioned the results were attacked as woke people do, so they were afraid to step up and be ostracized.
How many billions around the world were spent on a lie? While we need to be concerned with our environment and world, we need science, not politics, and any scientist playing games with the world should be dealt with. All IMO.
NOTE: the image with the chart is something I created for a previous article I posted, and this information has been known for years. But, once again, our Mainstream Media worked with the progressives to push a lie.
https://www.westernjournal.com/extreme-climate-model-scenario-widely-used-despite-impossible/
“In late April, the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change admitted that Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5, or RCP8.5, the high-emissions climate model scenario that dominated climate research and policy, was “implausible.”
This represented a tidal wave in the climate science and policy community. For more than a decade, the IPCC has treated RCP8.5 as the “business-as-usual” pathway, projecting global temperatures to rise by 4.3℃ or more by 2100 with all manner of “end of the world” results.
The IPCC has wielded RCP8.5 like a cudgel during treaty negotiations to beat government climate negotiators into multiple unjustified climate treaties restricting the use of fossil fuels.
The fact that RCP8.5 was “implausible” should have come as no surprise because many climate researchers were on the record noting from the outset that RCP8.5 was very unlikely and shouldn’t be treated as expected or business as usual. Yet that didn’t stop the vast majority of scientists publishing in the peer-reviewed literature and speaking to the mainstream media from treating it as such, calling on government leaders to impose a rapid transition away from fossil fuels in order to prevent the disastrous social, economic, and environmental outcomes that RCP8.5 forecast.
The Heartland Institute critiqued RCP8.5 from the start, noting it was not just implausible, but likely impossible, as far back as 2017. It was debunked in detail in Climate Change Reconsidered II: Fossil Fuels in 2019.
So, concerning the IPCC’s belated admission, in the immortal words of celluloid Die Hard hero John McClane, “Welcome to the party, pal.”