“Forget climate change. Democrats need to talk about other issues.” This marks the end of an era. Admits American voters largely do not see climate as a top priority;
We have been fed a never-ending diet of apocalyptic climate scares for years about killer heatwaves, biblical floods, and deadly droughts devastating hurricanes, to name just a few. (1)
All these scares have one thing in common; they are based on emissions scenarios which have long been regarded by independent experts as implausibly high. The scenario in question in known as RCP8.5.
RCPs are a set of greenhouse gas concentration trajectories used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for climate modelling and projections. They describe different possible future paths for atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations and the resulting radiative forcing by the year 2100. (1)
Activist climate scientists, journalists and net zero obsessed politicians are in shock following an official admission from the IPCC that this set of key assumptions promoting a climate crisis since 2011 are implausible. The notorious set of always-improbable pathway assumptions which fed into computer models trying to measure an unmeasurable climate are no more. Since around 2011, these ‘business as usual’ assumptions have produced outlandish claims of future climate catastrophes which have been lapped up by lap dog journalists and politicians. Roger Pielke Jr. called this ‘the most significant development in climate research in decades.’ (2)
The new framework has eliminated the most extreme scenarios that have dominated climate research over much of the past several decades. This is an absolutely huge development in climate science which will have lasting impact across research policy.
The future is not what it used to be reports Roger Pielke Jr. He adds, “What matters today is that the group with official responsibility for developing climate scenarios for the IPCC and broader research community has now admitted that the scenarios that have dominated climate research, assessment, and policy during the past two cycles of the IPCC assessment process are implausible. They describe impossible futures.” (3)
Tens of thousands of research papers have been and continue to be published using these scenarios, a similar number of media headlines have amplified their findings, and governments and international organizations have built these implausible scenarios into policy and regulation. We now know that all of this is built on a foundation of sand.
Why this matters. These scenarios live in policy. The now implausible upper end scenarios are not just academic constructs used in esoteric research. They are embedded in the policies and regulations of most of the world’s largest economies, found across the world’s most important multilateral institutions, and uses in the climate stress tests that govern hundreds of billions of dollars in bank capital. (3)
The cracks in the façade of the global climate science are getting wider, more glaring as a significant group of experts chooses to break rank.
A movement is gaining momentum within the scientific community that threatens to dismantle the official IPCC narrative from the inside out. This rebellion is led by 46 scientists, many of whom have direct experience working with the IPCC, who are now publicly challenging the foundational claims that have dictated global policy for decades. (4)
These researchers contend that the IPCC has relied on simulations that are heavily biased toward human-induced CO2 while systematically ignoring or downplaying natural variables. By prioritizing political consensus over raw data, these models have consistently overestimated global warming creating a gap between alarmist predictions and the actual temperature trends observed over the last several years.
The scientists suggest that the ‘climate emergency’ is less a scientific reality and more an ideological construct designed to drive the net zero agenda.
Furthermore, the group highlights the central role of natural drivers that are often missing from the mainstream conversation. They point to solar activity, atmospheric water vapor, and complex cloud cycles as the true drivers of earth’s climate. By looking back at historical periods like the Medieval Warm Period, they argue that the planet’s current warming is well within the bounds of natural variability and is not the unprecedented catastrophe it is often portrayed to be. (4)
The recent rescission of the EPA’s Greenhouse GAS Finding and Motor Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards Under the Clean Air Act marks one of the largest deregulation efforts in a generation. (5)
This rollback will lower costs, curb regulatory overreach, and restore accountability to Congress.
The Endangerment Finding was rescinded in February 2026 by President Trump and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin. This action stands to help make life more affordable, reduce regulatory uncertainty, and rein in an expansive administrate state.
The finding originally declared six greenhouse gases broadly endangered public health and welfare, thus requiring regulation. The Endangerment Finding was the bases for vehicle emission regulation, but soon spread beyond that, resulting in costly burdens for Americans.
Economic benefits of the rescission stem from the rollback of burdensome regulations. Repealing these regulations could help lower costs of energy production for both producers and consumers. Regulatory reform would also reduce the policy uncertainty from vague statutes, lowering the costs for both producers and consumers. (5)
Another nail in the coffin: A New York Times shock OPED, “Forget climate change. Democrats need to talk about other issues.” This marks the end of an era. Admits American voters largely do not see climate as a top priority. (6)
Read next: Governments ignored scientists’ warnings that climate scare was based on implausible scenarios
Email Us | Reader Friendly | Comments
