Climate Change Lies Exposed
-
-
- rodstradamus
- added this
A high-level inquiry into the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change found there was “little evidence” for its claims about global warming.
It also said the panel had emphasised the negative impacts of climate change and made “substantive findings” based on little proof.
The review by the InterAcademy Council (IAC) was launched after the IPCC’s hugely embarrassing 2007 benchmark climate change report, which contained exaggerated and false claims that Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035.
The panel was forced to admit its key claim in support of global warming was lifted from a 1999 magazine article. The report was based on an interview with a little-known Indian scientist who has since said his views were “speculation” and not backed by research.
Independent climate scientist Peter Taylor said last night: “The IPCC’s credibility has been deeply dented and something has to be done. It can’t just be a matter of adjusting the practices. They have got to look at what are the consequences of having got it wrong in terms of what the public think is going on. Admitting that it needs to reform means something has gone wrong and they really do need to look at the science.”
Climate change sceptic David Holland, who challenged leading climate change scientists at the University of East Anglia to disclose their research, said: “The panel is definitely not fit for purpose. What the IAC has said is substantial changes need to be made.”
The IAC, which comprises the world’s top science academies including the UK’s Royal Society, made recommendations to the IPCC to “enhance its credibility and independence” after the Himalayan glaciers report, which severely damaged the reputation of climate science.
....
Wow, didn't know the Royal Society had scientists not on the UN and Rockefeller payroll!
-
- groups:
- Community, Green, Comedy, The White Rose, 2 more
-
- tags:
- Politics, Green, Environment, UK, 9 more
-
-
toyotabedzrock
-
That was not the focus of the report. They did NOT check the science of the IPCC.
They studied organizational structure of the IPCC to provide recommendations on how they can be more transparent and agile.
- 1 year ago
-
toyotabedzrock
-
-
IceKat
-
"They all admit the IPCC is flawed and in need of an overhaul, yet they still insist the science is correct. Go figure. That’s pure rubbish, of course.
Bad process = bad product. "This comment, originally written about the media, also applies to those here who need, for whatever reason, to believe the IPCC is a sound and credible organisation.
"...it changes nothing regarding the science..." - JanForGore
And I agree. This changes nothing regarding the science - the 'science' has already been buggered for a long time!
The good news is there is good, credible science still out there, and once headlines like "World not in peril" become fashionable these scientific articles will emerge and people will see how they've been misled by bent scientists, politicians and ignorant scaremongers into believing we're going to boil. - 1 year ago
-
IceKat
-
-
JanforGore
-
http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2010/0830/IPCC-climate-change-panel-needs-t...
Your title is misleading and disingenuous. The report was hard hitting and much needed, but it didn't say the IPCC lost all credibility. Matter of fact, the recommendations made seek to restore any trust lost in its previous errors, and I hope they heed the advice. However, again, it changes nothing regarding the science behind this nor the moral obligation we have in preserving the planet and our climate balance especially in light of what is now unfolding.
- 1 year ago
-
JanforGore
-
-
IceKat
-
JanforGore:
The title is accurate and to the point, and if anything it's far too tame.
Maybe the article didn't say the IPCC has lost all credibility, (the article doesn't seem to be there now) but there are many people who know that to be the case.We're led to believe that the IPCC consists of thousands of credible scientists, all with the view that man is frying the planet. But when you look into the process you see that there's only a couple of dozen people running the show, and a show is what it is.
There's enough evidence here to write books about scams, falsifications and corruption. The IPCC has one aim and one aim only; to change the facts to fit the theory, and an incorrect theory is what it is, and yet still people fall for it. Pigeons learn faster than some people!
The IPCC have re-written history, and present anecdotal evidence as scientific fact. Their models are amusingly inaccurate - to say the least - and their head 'scientists' have been shown to be incompetent and corrupt on many occasions. Some people are just blind when it comes to facts."...preserving the planet and our climate balance especially in light of what is now unfolding."
Oh, so what's happening now? Is it not 60F and sunny everywhere in the world - like it always was before man built a factory - and therefore you conclude 'the climate is wrong'?
- 1 year ago
-
IceKat
-
-
oppressed1
-
JanforGore:
Ya like the hard hitting facts that came from a rock climbing magazine or the theses written by a college student that were added in the report.
- 1 year ago
-
oppressed1
-
-
oppressed1
-
The 2007 IPCC report could have been better put together by that squid that chose the winner of the world cup this year. If the radicals want their GW BS pushed further they are going to have to get rid of the idiot in charge of IPCC.
- 1 year ago
-
oppressed1
-
-
Dagum
-
Wow. That is shocking! I thought the investigation and report on the IPCC would be just another puff piece, conceding a few errors while still promoting AGW.
I guess not everyone drinks the Cool-Aid. It’s over! Time to dissolve the IPCC and return all money to America and European countries that contributed. allowing to spend and help stimulate their economies.
- 1 year ago
-
Dagum
