Taking it easy?

This blog post is a slight tangent to the main topic of sea level change but its an interesting argument about the validity of predictions being made regarding future sea level rise and its implications.

IPCC logo

An article in the journal Nature recently expressed concerns over the IPCC’s possible down playing of future predictions based on climate change. Whilst the overall article's subject was related to possible new sociological studies during the IPCC conferences, looking at the interactions between scientists during panel sessions where they discuss recent findings, model results and possible options for humanity.

There was however a small reference to recent sea level rise predictions and the fact that the IPCC chose to ignore the contributions of the Western Greenland ice sheet when publishing new projections for sea level rise. This was caused by an uncertainty into the validity of its modelling. The final assessment therefore projected a sea-level rise of up to 59 centimeters by 2100, even though many researchers currently predict a much larger rise.

Is the IPCC’s decision to downplay possible sea level rise due to uncertainty a good thing or is it simply a way of covering them from possible criticism if proved wrong?

Whilst it isn’t the time for scaremongering about unreasonable and untrue predictions this light and polite technique being used may be too soft on society. With the intention less on driving for support and publishing findings that have the majority consensus in the scientific community and more on covering the IPCC’s own back, in a tendency called ‘erring on the side of least drama (ESLD). Society may need a shock to get full attention on the problem at hand.

Here’s a link to the article:

http://www.nature.com/news/study-aims-to-put-ipcc-under-a-lens-1.13947

Another journal paper relevant to this subject can be found here:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378012001215

It's titled ‘Climate change prediction: Erring on the side of least drama?’ and provides a discussion into whether the scientific community has begun releasing conservative predictions over the previously alarmist model projections in fear or social uproar and criticism if they are found wrong.

References

Jeff Tollefson. (2013). Study aims to put IPCC under a lens. Nature. 502 (7471), 281.

Brysse, Keynyn et.al. (2013). Climate change prediction: Erring on the side of least drama?. Global Environmental Change. 23 (1), p327-337.