If you’ve been following the blog for a while, you will be aware that I’ve commented on a number of occasions about the whole RCP8.5 issue. You may also be aware that one of the chief protagonists in that whole discussion is Roger Pielke Jr, whose work I’ve also discussed from time to time. If so, you may be interested in his latest attempt to police the climate science community.
It’s a working paper on the Systemic Misuse of Scenarios in Climate Research and Assessment. The other author is Justin Ritchie who, in the past, wrote quite a sensible article with Zeke Hausfather.
I don’t really want to say too much about the new article, as I’m wary of incuring the wrath of Roger. One could, however, play a reasonable game of climate bingo with it. It includes Climategate, cites Grundmann (2013) unironically, of course discusses RCP8.5, implies a lack of research integrity amongst the climate research community, discusses problems with the IPCC and the US National Climate Assessment, and explains how climate research can get back on track (and avoid a growing credibility crisis).
I won’t say much more, as my main goal was to simply highlight the paper for those who might be interested. I’ll end, though, with a response from Nico Bauer, who is an Integrated Assessment Modeller at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research.
Systemic Misuse of Scenarios in Climate Research and Assessment – new working paper by Pielke & Ritchie.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-carbon-cycle-feedbacks-could-make-global-warming-worse – new Carbon Brief article by Zeke Hausfather and Richard Betts. I didn’t mention this in the post, but it does seem relevant to the whole RCP8.5/scenarios debate.