Climate Science Glossary

Term Lookup

Enter a term in the search box to find its definition.


Use the controls in the far right panel to increase or decrease the number of terms automatically displayed (or to completely turn that feature off).

Term Lookup


All IPCC definitions taken from Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Annex I, Glossary, pp. 941-954. Cambridge University Press.

Home Arguments Software Resources Comments The Consensus Project Translations About Support

Twitter Facebook YouTube Mastodon MeWe

RSS Posts RSS Comments Email Subscribe

Climate's changed before
It's the sun
It's not bad
There is no consensus
It's cooling
Models are unreliable
Temp record is unreliable
Animals and plants can adapt
It hasn't warmed since 1998
Antarctica is gaining ice
View All Arguments...

New? Register here
Forgot your password?

Latest Posts


Why the IPCC climate reports are so important

Posted on 6 August 2021 by Guest Author

The intergovernmental panel on climate change releases the definitive reports on global warming, with the next major report coming out in 2021 and 2022. But how do these reports actually work, and how far can you trust them?

Support ClimateAdam on Patreon:


1 1

Printable Version  |  Link to this page


Comments 1 to 7:

  1. IPCC is clearly biased towards man causing climate change from CO2.  They have extreme predictions that are highly unlikely but the media uses that for their scare tactics.  Politicians and naieve public believe it.  This is why many think there is a climate emergency, which is wrong.  It's all a big fraud to get control of energy.  Now Biden is mandating electric cars.  But these still need power plants.  Windmills and solar are barely energy positive and require massive waste dumps when used up.  Blades are not recyclable. 

    0 1
    Moderator Response:

    [PS] This is sloganeering. You are telling us what you believe to be true, but you are not offering any evidence to support the numerous assertions in your comment. Your confident statement that: IPCC are biased; that the model result that the IPCC reports on are unlikely; that windmills are solar are barely energy positive; all need to be supported by strong evidence since numerous evidence to the contrary is readily available from reputable sources.

    Please note that posting comments here at SkS is a privilege, not a right.  This privilege can be rescinded if the posting individual treats adherence to the Comments Policy as optional, rather than the mandatory condition of participating in this online forum.

    Please take the time to review the policy and ensure future comments are in full compliance with it.  Thanks for your understanding and compliance in this matter.

  2. rkcannon, the IPCC "bias" is often referred to as scientific consensus, the result of over 160 years of climate science showing conclusively that CO2 is a greenhouse gas.

    2 0
  3. Rkcannon @1 :

    You surprise me with your information.  Until now I had thought that the Jewish Space Lasers (exposed by US politician Marjorie Taylor Greene in 2021) were part of the secret battle of the Soros-Illuminati group against mankind's older adversaries, the Lizard People.

    But I am also puzzled by your information.  The Illuminati have been here on Earth for centuries , and the Lizard People for thousands of years (about 6000 years or more precisely from the very Beginning at 4004BC ).    So what exactly had these two nefarious groups been doing to achieve or maintain World Domination and Control before they invented the Climate Change scam?

    Please enlighten the readers here (if I may use the e-word).  Please be cautious and use slightly indirect language, so that the Pegasus* app and The Algorithms* do not detect and censor you (or worse).

    0 1
  4. Cross-posted from ClimateAdam's YouTube channel: 

    Unfortunately, the first comment [above]...illustrates the [lack of understanding] and superficiality of many who deny the reality and severity of the AGW/CC (Anthropological Global Warming and associated Climate Change) path that our human civilization is traveling. When a person posts about "extreme predictions" and claims that "It's all a big fraud to get control of energy", I always cringe.

    It is important to be aware that many people cannot - or will not attempt to - get past the simple concept of fixed "predictions" and that they do not understand the concept of "probable outcomes based on various CO2 emission scenarios."

    The essence of global warming and climate change is simple. The details are not. I am a retired American living in the rainforest mountains of Western Panama, and I actually took an online course in climate science from the University of British Columbia five years ago just to get the basics right.

    2 0
  5. About that "blades are not recyclable" bit:


    The company's website:

    0 0
  6. rkcannon #1

    This "big fraud" has obviously been going on at least since 1912!

    It's worth noting that the annual COemissions now are ten times higher than in 1912!

    Old news article about CO2

    0 0
  7. re around 1:40 min: "extremely likely" is actually defined by the IPCC as a 95-100% likelihood, not "95%" as CliamteAdam states.

    0 0

You need to be logged in to post a comment. Login via the left margin or if you're new, register here.

The Consensus Project Website


(free to republish)

© Copyright 2023 John Cook
Home | Translations | About Us | Privacy | Contact Us