Bolt nit picks an IPCC ABC interview. He miss uses evidence (NASA) and old hat arguments to keep his denier and pro coal stand alive. Show us your Coal Investments Andrew Bolt. Show us the Money.

Claim:

LEIGH SALES, PRESENTER: ... The United Nations’ climate change body’s new report says the scientific evidence is unambiguous about the warming of the planet .. The Earth is on a trajectory for warming of at least four degrees Celsius by 2100. That’ll mean more and longer heatwaves and storms and more species extinctions.

Alarmist.  Bolt is nit picking language . Then he drifts to some irrelevant history nothing about the Report to be found here.

In fact, the 4 degrees prediction is based on the report‘s highest estimate of the most extreme model of emissions and temperature sensitivity:

That extreme scenario does not predict “at least” 4 degrees of warming by 2100 but 2.6.
(Note, by the way, that even the worst IPCC prediction of sea level rises comes more than 99 metres short of the 100 metres that ABC science presenter Robyn Williams once suggested was possible and has never corrected.)

Claim:

LEIGH SALES:… I was joined earlier tonight by Lesley Hughes, one of the lead authors on this Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report…
LESLEY HUGHES, LEAD AUTHOR, IPCC REPORT: Well under a - what we call a business as usual trajectory - and we’ve already had about a degree of warming since pre-industrial times; we will almost certainly get another half a degree or a degree by 2030. Under a business as usual trajectory, the IPCC is saying 3.7 to 4.8 degrees by the end of this century.

False, exaggeration: I'm not sure what Bolt has discovered here it does say up to 4.8 degrees how is that an exaggeration of a worst case scenario? Very messy try at point making here.

Check the box. Under the most extreme scenario the IPCC predicts a rise of between 2.6 and 4.8 degrees.

Claim:

LESLEY HUGHES: Well, we’re also seeing the ice caps melting, sea levels going up, coastal flooding increasing, we’re seeing increases in hotter, drier drought, hotter, drier heatwaves.

False:  Bolt is in fact false NOOA has taken issue with this as one pole is sea ice the other on land and both support warming.

Only one ice cap is melting. Antarctica, however, has had record sea ice, which has grown steadily since records started in 1979. The IPCC last year conceded “there is not enough evidence at present to suggest more than low confidence in a global-scale observed trend in drought or dryness (lack of rainfall) since the middle of the 20th century” and past “conclusions regarding global increasing trends in drought since the 1970s were probably overstated”.

Claim:

LESLEY HUGHES: ... Here in Australia we’re suffering the effects of earlier bushfire seasons. 

Misleading: A pause in not "no warming" 2005 & 2012 broke all records. This has been explained

Last year’s early bushfire was an anomaly that cannot be attributed to global warming, especially given 16 years of no world-wide warming. Moreover, there have been many past examples of early bushfires in Australia, and last year’s fires had more to do with three years of good fuel-feeding rains that warmists claimed we wouldn’t get.

Claim:

LEIGH SALES: The report also acknowledges the pause in warming over the past decade, which is something that climate sceptics often point to.

False: Bolt's figures hav been proven to be false

The report in fact admits to not 10 but at least 15 years of a warming pause: “the rate of warming over the past 15 years (1998–2012; 0.05 [–0.05 to 0.15] °C per decade), which begins with a strong El Niño, is smaller than the rate calculated since 1951 (1951–2012; 0.12 [0.08 to 0.14] °C per decade”.

Claim:

LESLEY HUGHES:  ... But when we look at the global climate, the global climate has not stopped warming. About 90 per cent of the extra heat is going into the oceans and there’s been absolutely no pause in the warming of the ocean. 

False: JPL declared their findings did not throw suspicion on global warming

NASA last month announced: ”The cold waters of Earth’s deep ocean have not warmed measurably since 2005, according to a new NASA study, leaving unsolved the mystery of why global warming appears to have slowed in recent years… The temperature of the top half of the world’s ocean — above the 1.24-mile mark — is still climbing, but not fast enough to account for the stalled air temperatures.” Hughes’ excuse for the missing heat won’t wash.

Claim:

LESLEY HUGHES: Well I’d say to them firstly that about - the latest survey is that 98 per cent of practising climate scientists are actually at one on this, so there is extremely broad scientific consensus.

False or misleading: This is a new report with even more scientists in agreement and more countries

The various surveys making this have have been comprehensively debunked. One is based on just 79 responses. Last years included as members of the 97 per cent climate scientists such as Craig Idso, Nicola Scafetta, Nir J. Shaviv and Nils- Axel Morner, whose all question the alleged consensus and say the survey authors ignored or misrepresented their work. In such surveys, the most that can usually be said is that scientists agree man has some influence on the climate, which is hardly controversial.

Claim: Bolt obviously thinks doctors are arrogant as well shamans should be asked for their opinion as well, Science is the only method we have to understand the world about us. Some do believe in the power of prayer

LESLEY HUGHES:… If you want to know about the climate, go to climate scientists.

Arrogance, refusal to admit mistakes:

In fact, climate scientists did not predict this warming pause. They did not predict record crop yields. They did not predict record ice in Antarctica. They did not predict fewer hurricane and cyclones. They did not predict a return here of dam-filling rains. And even the IPCC now admits that the climate models build by climate scientists are just not predicting the temperatures were actually getting: “For the period from 1998 to 2012, 111 of the 114 available climate-model simulations show a surface warming trend larger than the observations.”

Claim: We have just been declared a pariah by 120 nations that are doing something

LESLEY HUGHES: ... Australia is somewhat at odds with the rest of the international community.

False:

Australia was at odds with the rest of the world only when we had the world’s most punitive carbon tax, measured by tax raised per head of population. Most of the world does not have any national carbon tax or emissions trading scheme.

Claim:

LESLEY HUGHES: ...There will be boundless opportunities from renewable energy.

False:  The costs are falling faster as we speak. Guess the Germans are techno ignorant. We have cut scientific budgets yet Bolt considers we are smarter...that's the definition of arrogance

Renewable energy from wind, solar, tidal or geothermal is in fact a cost, not an opportunity. That is why each sector is demanding big subsidies or taxes on cheaper forms of power.

Claim:

LESLEY HUGHES: ... So, in my view, it’s our moral duty as people in a developed country to help the developing countries leap forward into development without making the same dirty mistakes that we did.

Hyperbole, misleading: Coal in fact is killing the Indian poor. There is a tax on it coal reduction is a primary goal that's not a hyperbole. Australia has gone into partnership with Adani his record of enviromental vandalism is on the record

Cheap, coal-fired power actually is the foundation of so much Western wealth and development, from which poor countries have also benefited - not just from the power but from the transfer of aid and technology, as well as from trade. China and India have in fact determined to increase their own emissions, because ending poverty depends heavily on coal-fired generation - and ending poverty is no “mistake”.

Claim:

LESLEY HUGHES: Absolutely. I mean, President Modi in India has said he wants to see a solar panel on every roof in India. Countries like Australia should be helping with that, not shipping coal off there.

False, hyperbole, ideological extremism:  Not at all true the cost of coal in India is cheaper than Australia. India's solar energy program is expanding and rapidly. We might be able to blackmail them in a deal with uranium. But we have signed world agreements against bribery

Modi wants India to have both solar and coal, and is in fact opening India’s coal reserves to foreign investors. Solar alone cannot come close to giving electricity to all Indians, especially not to all Indian businesses. Ending coal exports to India would hurt us and India both. If we don’t give India our coal, it will be forced to go somewhere else - and pay more.