The articles I've linked show the failings of arguable the two most noteworthy climate change advocates, Al Gore and James Hansen (a real climate scientist). This perfectly illustrates my point that the communication on this topic has been complete bunk. But if you want failings from the UN, you don't have to look very far.
>1990 IPCC
Under the IPCC ‘Business as Usual’ emissions of greenhouse gases the average rate of increase of global mean temperature during the next century is estimated to be 0.3°C per decade
>Outcome
0.12°C-0.19°C Depending on your source
>1990 IPCC
This will result in a likely increase in global mean temperature of about 1°C above the present value by 2025
>Outcome
0.31°C to 0.49°C by 2017, depending on your source.
>2007 IPCC
by 2020, between 75 and 250 million of people are projected to be exposed to increased water stress due to climate change
>Outcome
Confidence is low for a global-scale observed trend in drought or dryness (lack of rainfall) since the middle of the 20th century, owing to lack of direct observations, methodological uncertainties and geographical inconsistencies in the trends (Source UN IPCC)
>2007 IPCC
There is a very high likelihood that Himalayan glaciers will disappear by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner if the Earth keeps warming at the current rate.
>Outcome
IPCC later outright recanted this prediction saying it was not peer reviewed https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/jan/20/ipcc-him...
>2001 IPCC
Fire frequency is expected to increase with human-induced climate change, and that several authors suggest that climate change is likely to increase the number of days with severe burning conditions, prolong the fire season, and increase lightning activity, all of which lead to probable increases in fire frequency and areas burned
>Outcome
Globally, the total acreage burned by fires each year declined by 24 percent between 1998 and 2015 https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/06/170629175502.h...
Given how things are going, about 1°C by 2025 is still possible. Also, there was a slowing in temperature increase from 1998 to 2012. But now we're back at the long-term trend. I suspect that Chinese SOx emissions from coal played a role, by increasing cloudiness. Cuts in SOx emissions in the 70s arguably increased the warming rate. And if that's true, the shit will hit the fan as China cuts coal use. Because the residence halflife for SOx is so much lower than that for CO2.
I don't know the water stress stuff. But California has been pretty screwed. Let's see what happens in the US Southwest over the next decade or so.
Maybe we still have Himalayan glaciers, but high-altitude glaciers have generally not fared so well, I think.
You're misusing that data on area burned by fires. The page actually says ...
> The ongoing transition from nomadic cultures to settled lifestyles and intensifying agriculture has led to a steep drop not only in the use of fire on local lands, but in the prevalence of fire worldwide, researchers found.
... and ...
> Across Africa, fires typically burn an area about half the size of the continental United States every year, said Niels Andela, a research scientist at Goddard and lead author on the paper. In traditional savanna cultures with common lands, people often set fires to keep grazing lands productive and free of shrubs. As many of these communities have shifted to cultivate more permanent fields and to build more houses, roads and villages, the use of fire declines. As economic development continues, the landscape becomes more fragmented, communities often enact legislation to control fires and the burned area declines even more.
The recent experience in Russia, northern Europe, California, etc does seem consistent with predictions. But I agree that there's not enough data to be confident yet.