The United Nations climate committee has officially removed its most extreme warming projections from active use. The decision, finalized earlier this month, eliminates the RCP8.5 scenario along with its successor pathways, SSP5-8.5 and SSP3-7.0.
These models had assumed a near-tripling of global coal consumption, an absence of any climate policy, and population growth exceeding realistic demographic forecasts. For 15 years, these projections were treated as a standard reference point. They are no longer included in the committee’s framework.
President Donald Trump responded to the decision on Truth Social on Friday. He characterized it as a defeat of what he called “Climate Alarmism nonsense.” The president stated the projections were “WRONG!
WRONG! WRONG!” and accused Democrats of leveraging them to advance a “GREEN NEW SCAM.” He framed the retirement as a triumph for “TRUTH, SCIENCE, and FACT.” The practical implications extend beyond political reactions. For over a decade, governments, central banks, and media organizations used RCP8.5 as the default worst-case scenario.
This influenced investment decisions worth trillions of dollars. It shaped insurance risk assessments.
It established the foundation for major climate policy discussions. The committee acknowledged that the underlying assumptions were never realistic. RCP8.5 projected coal use nearly tripling, no meaningful climate policies anywhere in the world, and population growth at the upper boundary of demographic projections. This was not a plausible future but a stress test.
Yet it was frequently presented as “business as usual.” That framing drove headlines, funding, and public concern. The committee’s removal of these scenarios represents the most substantial change in climate-scenario practice since the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report.
The new CMIP7 modeling framework, adopted earlier this month, excludes these pathways. Future climate projections will begin from a different baseline—one grounded in realistic assumptions. This does not indicate that climate change is not occurring.
The report does not state that. The committee does not state that.
What it states is that a specific set of projections was wrong, overstated, and implausible. For years, activists and officials cited RCP8.5 as evidence of imminent catastrophe. That was a mistake.
The data did not support it. The practical result is that policy debates can now rely on actual science rather than an unrealistic worst-case scenario.
This does not mean the problem is resolved. It means the framing has been corrected—a correction long overdue. President Trump’s reaction is expected.
He views the retirement as validation and uses it to criticize the Green New Deal and climate activism broadly. However, the core fact remains: the UN’s climate committee acknowledged that its signature worst-case projection was implausible.
This changes the conversation. For investors, risk models require updating. For regulators, stress tests based on RCP8.5 are no longer credible.
For the public, the most alarming climate headlines of the past decade were built on an unsound foundation. The committee did not say climate change is a hoax.
It did not say warming will stop. It said the worst-case scenario used to generate fear was not realistic. That is the truth—and it has been a long time coming.
