The climate catastrophe has been called off – the plundering continues. Politicians and the media are complicit.
In this article for EIKE – European Institute for Climate and Energy, author Michael Limburg examines the political and media fallout after the IPCC quietly dropped the extreme RCP8.5 climate scenario as a plausible future pathway. The debate in the German Bundestag raises broader questions about how climate risks have been communicated — and whether exaggerated scenarios were used to justify far-reaching policies.
Screenshot from the Bundestag broadcast while Mark Helferich of the CDU was giving a speech.
Source: YouTube
Michael Limburg
Date: 27 May 2026
On May 20, 2026, the AfD requested a topical debate in the Bundestag to show how the Bundestag was reacting to the withdrawal of the “RCP 8.5 disaster scenario”.
The media coverage following the AfD’s topical debate on May 20, 2026, was very subdued and largely followed the usual polarization pattern. It was therefore quite limited. The AfD had requested this debate because the IPCC/CMIP7 framework no longer uses the extreme emissions scenario RCP 8.5 (or SSP5-8.5) as a plausible worst-case scenario. Scientists (including Detlef van Vuuren et al., as well as Stefan Rahmstorf from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK)) deemed it unrealistic – primarily due to the success of renewable energies (which is completely wrong, see the emissions diagram and the box below) and altered emissions patterns. (Industry goes bankrupt or relocates.)
The topic therefore did not become a major editorial issue but rather received little attention in science and politics sections. It also did not generate a huge wave of editorials or dominate the news for days.
But the supposed success of “renewables” is – as always with the established parties – completely out of touch with reality:
Because only about 2.8% (solar approx. 1.3%, wind approx. 1.5%) of global primary energy was converted into electricity from wind and solar power in 2024. According to the Energy Institute’s Statistical Review of World Energy 2025 (new Physical Energy Content method, which measures the actual energy content):
- Wind: 1.5% (9.04 EJ)
- Solar: 1.3% (7.72 EJ)
- Total: approx. 2.8%
What exactly happened?
The core of the debate: The AfD (especially Karsten Hilse) seized the opportunity to label RCP 8.5 “a horror scenario” and “humanity’s greatest fraud,” claiming it had been used for years to spread panic and justify costly measures. They demanded consequences for politicians, the courts (e.g., a ruling by the Federal Constitutional Court), and the media. The other parliamentary groups (CDU/CSU, SPD, Greens, and Left Party) saw it primarily as proof of the effectiveness of climate protection : Because renewables were so successful, the worst-case scenario had become unrealistic—therefore, no reason to change policy. (See the example of Mark Helferich, CDU climate spokesperson, at Epoch Times and Apollo, and the box above.)
Here is the example on Apollo.
Other scenarios with significant warming (up to approximately 3–3.5 °C) would, however, remain. In the nearly empty Bundestag – during the heated debate (see image above) – Karsten Hilse (AfD) said that RCP 8.5 was a “horror scenario that was never plausible,” which had served for years to spread panic, justify expensive measures, and was even used for the 2021 Federal Constitutional Court ruling. He spoke of the “end of the greatest deception in human history” and demanded consequences for politics, the media, and the courts. The CDU/CSU should distance itself from “socialists and communists.”
Screenshot Nius
Der Welt-Untergang ist abgesagt. Bitte weiterverbreiten: Die bisherigen Horrorszenarien des Weltklimarates wurden von seinen eigenen Wissenschaftler kassiert (sie werden im Artikel in European Geosciences Union (van Vuuren und 43 andere) als inplausibel…
— Vahrenholt (@FritzVahrenholt) May 13, 2026
The end of the world has been called off. Please spread the word: The previous horror scenarios of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have been refuted by its own scientists (they are described in the European Geosciences Union article (van Vuuren and 43 others) as implausible …
— Vahrenholt (@FritzVahrenholt) May 13, 2026
Key media reports
- Süddeutsche Zeitung (SZ) : A detailed report explaining the scientific update (RCP 8.5 is no longer considered plausible). It emphasizes that the new scenario “still looks bleak” and places the AfD debate in the context of Trump and “making waves.” Typical SZ: scientifically sound, but with a clear stance against right-wing instrumentalization.
- Documentation produced by the German Bundestag itself : A neutral summary of the positions, showing how controversial the debate was.
- taz / left-wing media : Emphasize that the removal of the extreme scenario is precisely a success of climate policy (see above). The AfD is portrayed as an “agitator” against climate protection. No all-clear signal, but rather a “ray of hope thanks to renewables.”
- Media close to the AfD / right-wing (e.g. via AfD channels, Telegram etc.): Large celebration as the “end of the fraud”, demand for the abolition of the CO₂ tax etc.
- Public broadcasters (phoenix, ARD Mediathek): There were live streams and summaries of the debate, but no extensive follow-up coverage.
- Only alternative media outlets like Achgut , Apollo , Tichys Einblick or Nius gave the topic ample space.
Overall impression
The mainstream media didn’t ignore the issue , but they didn’t sensationalize it either , which would have been essential given the nature of the topic. Instead, they downplayed it, calling it a tactical move by the AfD and treating it as a scientific fine-tuning, not a gamechanger for German climate policy.
Many reports emphasize: “No reason to sound the all-clear; the other scenarios remain serious.” Typical of highly politicized topics in Germany: Left-wing/mainstream media frame it as “the AfD is trying to discredit climate protection,” while the AfD sees it as proof of years of exaggeration. There was no major uproar – two days later the topic had already died down somewhat.
This article was previously published on eike-klima-energie.eu under the title ‘Die Klimakatastrophe ist abgesagt – der Raubzug geht weiter. Politik und Medien machen mit.’
Translated from German by Eric Vieira
more news
Climate Cult’s Inevitable Dissolution
The collapse of the Paris Agreement and the unmasking of the net zero illusion were never hard to predict for anyone with a shred of intellectual honesty. It didn’t take a fancy research title or an advanced degree. The writing was carved deep into the stone of energy reality, which no press release, no activist lobby and no billionaire-backed foundation could erase.
You can’t make laws against the sun
Astrophysicist Willie Soon has been researching the influence of the sun on the climate for decades. In an interview with Weltwoche, he explains why he does not view CO2 as a climatic control factor, how political and financial structures shape scientific findings and why he continues to research despite hostility.
2025 global tropical cyclone season debunks climate hysteria
Looking at the full global tropical cyclone picture for 2025, the season’s trends undercut the exaggerated claims of “worsening storms” and remind us that climate hysteria too often outpaces the facts.
