Climate Scientist on: "The Manufactured 97% Consensus"

Climate Scientist Prof Judith Curry gives testimony on the state of the science of climate change before the House committee on the 15th April, 2015.

This video from 1000frolly of Judith Curry contains of highlights of that testimony, including:

  • Concerned that the Climate Change Problem and its solution have been vastly oversimplified;
  • the central issue is extent to which the recent and future warmings is cased by human caused GHG emissions vs natural climate variability;
  • recent data calls into question  whether humans are the dominant cause;
  • reduced estimates of the sensitivity of climate to carbon dioxide;
  • climate models that predict much more warming than has been observed so far;
  • hypothesised climate tipping points are extremely unlikely in the 21st century;
  • the climate models are running way too hot compared with the actual data;
  • extreme statements have come from the White House without justification;
  • Wind and Solar Energy are not up to the challenge;
  • A Manufactured Consensus that we are all supposed to follow
The chairman brings up the point that President Obama keeps linking extreme weather events with climate change. Is he right?

The IPCC, who I regard as a little bit on the alarmist side, frankly, even they acknowledge in their special report on extreme weather events and climate change published 2012, that there is essentially no connection between human caused climate change and extreme weather events.  
This is pushed for reasons of pure politics.

Senator Palmer asked Judith Curry to explain how the administration claims that 2014 is the warmest year on record.

OK. There's about a half dozen different groups doing these analyses and all but one of them found that 2014 was right at the top. But, if you look at the uncertainty in these measurements, most of them found that 2014 was in a statistical tie with two other years, 2005 and 2010, and the UK group with a far more realistic assessment of the uncertainty found 2014 was tied with nine other years. You really couldn't distinguish them statistically. That however was NOT how all this was communicated to the public.   
A long non question from Representative Beyer, ending in "climate change is real...."was answered:
Scientifically the term "climate Change" means "a change in climate," and it's changed for the last 4 billion years or so. This whole issue of human caused climate change is a relatively recent notion.  
So climate is always changing and is going to change in the future. The issue is how much of the change is caused by humans. We don't know. We don't know what the 21st century holds. Climate change may be really unpleasant and that may happen independently  of anything humans do.

When Beyer again brought up the debate about the warmest year, Dr Curry replied:
The climate has been warming since the 1700s, since we came out of the Little Ice Age. We don't know what's causing that warming. 
In the 18th century and the 19th century it's not attributed to humans, so there are other things going on in the climate system that have been contributing to warming over several centuries. We can't blame all of this on humans. And we don't know how all of this is going to play out in the 21st century. We just don't know.
John Moolenaar asked about statements like "the debate is over;" "scientists unanimously agree..."
Whenever I despair of what's going on in the climate field, I look at the recent collapse of the consensus on cholesterol and heart disease......these things, if they're not correct will eventually collapse. Scepticism is one of the four norms of science. It is absolutely essential for scientific progress. It's our job to question the evidence and re-assess conclusions. That's what we're supposed to do. However, in the climate field, there's this manufactured consensus that we're all supposed to step in line and follow. It's rather bizarre. It's disagreement and debate that moves science forward. 
A short half hour video.