[Terrapreta] IPCC Integreity

[Greg and April]

I think you take a real hard look, you will find more than just climate scientists on that list of the IPCC - IIRC, there were atmospheric physicists, agriculture scientists, hydrosphere, biologists, ecologists ( and so on ), on that list - so counting them all as climate scientists, is not exactly kosher, yet comparing them to all the scientist in the world would be a little more accurate.

The IPCC is a bunch of people from a" broad range of expertise and perspectives relevant to the issues " not doing their own research, but relying on the papers of others to form an opinion.

It was established by the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme and The IPCC Panel is composed of representatives appointed by governments and organizations. 



From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPCC 

The IPCC Panel is composed of representatives appointed by governments and organizations.    Participation of delegates with appropriate expertise is encouraged ( *** Not Required *** ). 
The stated aims of the IPCC are to assess scientific information relevant to:

  1.. human-induced climate change, 
  2.. the impacts of human-induced climate change, 
  3.. options for adaptation and mitigation. 

Hmmm..... let's think that one through - The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in COP-2 decides to accept the work of the IPCC, which in turn was actually formed in part by another UN organization, and the goal of the IPCC is to assess human related climate change???    It's not about the climate in general, but specifically looking for human induced climate change.

The IPCC lives and breaths on human induced change,if they can't justify them selves they are out of a job - pure and simple.

-    A December 20, 1995, Reuters report quoted British scientist Keith Shine, one of IPCC's lead authors, discussing the Policymakers' Summary. He said: "We produce a draft, and then the policymakers go through it line by line and change the way it is presented.... It's peculiar that they have the final say in what goes into a scientists' report". It is not clear, in this case, whether Shine was complaining that the report had been changed to be more skeptical, or less, or something else entirely.

-    Solid-state physicist Frederick Seitz, president emeritus of Rockefeller University and past president of the National Academy of Sciences, has publicly denounced the IPCC report, writing "I have never witnessed a more disturbing corruption of the peer-review process than the events that led to this IPCC report". 



Ok we have a organization that is put together ( by in part a UN organization ), it's goals are to specifically deal with human based climate change and the participants don't even have to have experience in that field.    In turn, another UN organization decides to accept it's reports as the last word in world climate, yet we find out that the reports are not always what actual scientists are writing, but at least in part revised summaries, some of which bear faint resemblance to the actual report.



Yes, I think there is an integrity issue.



As to Nobel Foundation, I personally don't know of any other time that the prize was given out to people resting on the work of others, do you?.



Greg H.

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Sean K. Barry 
  To: Terra Preta ; Greg and April 
  Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2008 19:51
  Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] IPCC Integreity


  Hi Greg,

  I can see you like to play games with semantics and statistics, too.  I don't think all scientists are equipped as well as the 1500+ IPCC climate scientists and other associated scientist consultants of the IPCC.  Get a second opinion from the Nobel Foundation or from other Nobel Laureates, if you like.

  Regards,

  SKB
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /attachments/20080419/f53543c5/attachment.html