I have terrible news on the most critical constant used in climate change calculations. If this number is wrong, every climate change calculation using it will also be wrong.

The following is a bit technical, but I have included definition links to make it easier to grasp how crucial and bad this climate change calculation error is for your climate future and the severe legal liability exposure for every corporation and government worldwide that uses the United Nations's Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change (IPCC) Climate Change Summary Reports.

And, there is a bit of good news at the end of this article about how this news can be used positively.

The following contains the reasons why past climate change predictions and solutions by the world's leading climate change authority (the UN's IPCC) are no longer valid, have been wrong for a long time and need to be re-done correctly and reissued immediately.

Overview of the IPCC's Major Climate Change Calculation Error

The single most critical climate change number is known as the climate sensitivity constant. Climate sensitivity is a measure of how much Earth's surface will warm fo a doubling in the atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO₂) concentration.

A 2023 peer-reviewed study points to probability that the IPCC is keeping this all-important climate sensitivity constant, which is used in the most critical climate calculations artificially low despite continual protests by recognized climate scientists over the last several decades. 

 

According to this new 2023 peer-reviewed study, the correct climate sensitivity constant is 4.8 degrees Celsius, not the 3 degrees Celsius constant currently used by the IPCC over the last decades in almost ALL foundational climate change calculations.

This nearly 60% difference in the correct 4.8 degrees Celsius climate sensitivity constant over the IPCC's incorrect 3 degrees Celsius constant is NOT a minor or low-impact matter concerning your future.

The 2023 study that disclosed this massive climate sensitivity error is called Global Warming in the Pipeline. It is by James Hansen et al. (James Hansen is the renowned climate scientist who, while at NASA in the 1980s, was primarily responsible for bringing the climate change emergency globally into the public mind.)

This corrected 4.8 degrees Celsius climate sensitivity constant amount powerfully indicates climate consequences will be far worse and far beyond than what our governments and the media are telling us.

It also means the fossil fuel reduction target amounts that many of our governments have agreed to for reducing global climate change are also grossly underestimated by as much as 60%. 

This corrected 4.8 degrees Celsius climate sensitivity constant also points to the fact that we are already in the worst-case climate change scenario that honest climate researchers have been warning about and for which humanity is not even remotely prepared. 

The worst outcome of having the climate sensitivity constant not being 3 degrees Celsius but 4.8 degrees Celsius (about 60% greater) is that almost all of the climate calculations provided by the IPCC upon which governments, media, and the whole world depend for accurate climate consequence severity estimates, consequence arrival timeframes, and the correct global fossil fuel reduction target amounts are now wildly incorrect!

This corrected climate sensitivity constant of 4.8 degrees Celsius also means that not only are our worst climate change fears confirmed. It also means that when you also include all the factors listed in reasons 1-5 further below, almost all of the IPCC's climate change consequence severity, timeframes and global fossil fuel reduction targets are underestimated by up to 60%.

The gaping illogicalness of the IPCC's keeping the all-important climate sensitivity amount fixed at 3 degrees Celsius for decades when an incorrect calculation as critical as this would put the world's survival at stake makes one wonder:

a. who might have the required super-leverage to "bend" the math behind the scenes at the IPCC and,

b. who would most profit by keeping the global fossil fuel reduction target about 60% lower than it should have been?

Is it believable that the IPCC would continue to pick the low 3 degrees Celsius constant and fail to apply the Precautionary Principle of wise risk management when the very survival of billions of people is at stake and their survival substantively depends upon having and using the most correct information?

The Precautionary Principle implies that there is a social and legal responsibility to protect the public from exposure to harm, when scientific investigation has found a plausible risk. These protections should be relaxed only if further scientific findings emerge that provide sound evidence that no harm will result.

Yet, extensive older climate sensitivity evidence and the new Hansen 2023 study clearly indicate more harm will come to humanity from using the lower 3 degrees Celsius constant and not the correct 4.8 degrees Celsius constant. What hidden influence or agenda could possibly be directing (or forcing) the IPCC to choose climate calculations known to cause more harm and death and render humanity less warned and less prepared for what is coming? 

The illustration below helps to show that as climate conditions worsen and as more carbon goes into the atmosphere, the climate sensitivity constant also needs to be adjusted accordingly because of a variety of factors.

 

The "good news" regarding the highly suspicious 60% climate sensitivity error by the IPCC

1. The next time you hear a global fossil fuel reduction target or climate consequence report from your government or the media, you can wisely discount whatever they are saying by up to 60%.

2. Unlike those denying the climate change emergency or those who believe the current government and media climate change timetables and solutions are correct, being so warned, you still have time to plan and prepare and you have a new and appropriate urgency. You do not need to panic over this horrible climate change news. 

3. Because you know about this new 2023 Hansen study, you, your family, and your business will not be caught completely unaware, unprepared, or vulnerable when the world gets hit by the next big wave of severe climate change-driven extreme weather storms or other climate consequences. 

 

 

Unfortunately, it is not just the new 2023 Hansen climate change study results to be concerned about 

There are also other big reasons to be very concerned about the IPCC's severe underestimation problems in almost everything you hear from your governments and the media about climate change:

About the severe legal liability exposure for every corporation and government worldwide that uses the IPCC's Climate Change Summary Reports

Because the IPCC's Climate Change Summary Reports have been widely, conclusively, and repeatedly shown by numerous peer-reviewed climate studies to be grossly underestimated by 60% and additionally politically compromised by fossil fuel interests having undue influence over the IPCC, any corporation or government who has used (or continues to use) the IPCC's Climate Change Summary Reports has a severe legal liability exposure in any climate change risk disclosures used in any of their purchase agreements, insurance policies, investment disclosures, or anywhere else their legal or agency documents discuss climate changes consequence risks. For example, this new liability exposure applies to zoning agencies that have issued future flood plain ratings based on IPCC Summary Report predictions. 

This now means that all corporations and governments that used the IPCC's Climate Change Summary Reports in any of their risk disclosures for property purchases, insurance, investments, etc, must immediately update those disclosures with notices to their clients of the correct new levels of climate risk based on the corrected climate change consequence calculations that are not underestimated by 60%. This climate change-related risk and disclosure update may not shield the corporations and governments from past climate change consequence liabilities because, proper due diligence by their chief executives and law firms should have discovered the well-documented and widespread prior challenges to the inaccuracy of IPCC's Summary Reports by the climate change science community.

What we need to do with the current IPCC Climate Change Summary Report and demand in future reports

The IPCC gross underestimation of climate sensitivity in its summary reports requires some immediate action:

1. The world's citizens, governments, corporations, and media must demand that the IPCC's latest climate change summary report is immediately re-done and re-issued using the correct climate sensitivity constant, that all other known errors and omissions are also fixed, and that all fossil fuel favorable conflicts of interest are removed. Until this corrected new climate change summary report is issued, we strongly recommend discounting everything in the existing uncorrected report by 60%.

This IPCC underestimation crisis means that IPCC-predicted climate consequences can be viewed as being 60% worse than we are being told and will arrive 60% sooner than the IPCC has predicted. This underestimation crisis also means that the IPPC calculations for global fossil fuel calculations are 60% too little and must be achieved 60% sooner than the current IPCC fossil fuel reduction deadlines.(Please see this page, which summarizes the many decades of severe IPCC underestimation issues, critical calculation issues and omissions, and other IPCC methods to "cook" and distort the climate change calculations to allow the global fossil fuel cartel to continue selling even more fossil fuel amounts and avoid meaningful government regulations to reduce global fossil fuel use.)

2. If the IPCC does not immediately re-issue corrected climate change summary reports resolving its known conflict of interest, underestimation, and other issues, then the IPCC must be bypassed and discarded as a credible, trusted source of climate change information. Then, to get honest climate information to corporations, governments, the media, and the world's citizens, a new climate change research authority must be created independent of all fossil fuel or governmental conflicts of interest.

In Summary

Because of all the cumulative, synergistic, and dialectically interacting factors in Hansen's new 2023 study and in 1-5 above, most climate researchers and activists do not realize that we are already in the worst-case climate change scenario!

The IPCC's climate calculations have far too many severe ongoing calculation problems, which have consistently underestimated the climate change emergency for years and what must be done to fix it. This consistent underestimation pattern now becomes one of the best proofs of the cartel's ongoing invisible hand distorting traditionally relied-upon global climate change information at its "trusted" source. 

This "trusted" source-level distortion of correct climate risks also condemns the world's population to be unable to think about the climate change emergency correctly. Worse yet, it also prevents our politicians from being adequately informed so that they act on climate change appropriately.

Our ongoing climate change nightmare is being fueled by the fossil fuel cartel's global disinformation campaigns and their behind-the-scenes nefarious manipulations. These actions have caused long delays in executing honest governmental regulation, which could have reduced global fossil fuel emissions to what they should have been beginning more than four decades ago.

To help do something about the climate change and global warming emergency, click here.

Sign up for our free Global Warming Blog by clicking here. (In your email, you will receive critical news, research, and the warning signs for the next global warming disaster.)

To share this blog post: Go to the Share button to the left below.