This is a guest post by Climate Nexus.
Judith Curry’s latest op-ed in the Wall Street Journal touts her new study co-authored with Nic Lewis. The takeaway of the piece - that the need for emissions reductions is “less urgent” than policymakers assume – is not even supported by her own study, much less the scientific mainstream.
Curry provides a highly biased and skewed overview of climate sensitivity studies, which makes sense for publication in the Wall Street Journal. In reality, the IPCC sensitivity estimate remains the most reliable and comprehensive expression of the state of knowledge on the topic, and scientists agree that this sensitivity range implies an urgent need for climate action.
- Curry’s study doesn’t reveal new information that would affect IPCC estimates.
- She examines only a small group of studies that agree with her conclusion, while the IPCC took many additional methods and factors into account.
- Even low climate sensitivities still carry an urgent need to reduce greenhouse gas pollution.
- Curry has growing ties to denier groups and her consulting business serves fossil fuel companies.