More IPCC Controversy
Newsbytes: New Research Reveals IPCC In Bed With Green Lobbies | Watts Up With That?
Hardly the worlds top scientists in the fieldscathing new expose on the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change — which sets the world’s agenda when it comes to the current state of the climate — claims that its reports have often been written by graduate students with little or no experience in their field of study and whose efforts normally might be barely enough to satisfy grad school requirements
Temperatures may go down as well as up terms and conditions apply.
So, .... from Benny Peiser, the Global Warming Policy Foundation and WUWT - I hardly think you will find your 'truth' which you claim to be searching for there MBP.
Denial is a defense mechanism in which a person is faced with a fact that is too uncomfortable to accept and rejects it instead, insisting that it is not true despite what may be overwhelming evidence.
Denial is a mechanism of the immature mind, because it conflicts with the ability to learn from and cope with reality.
So it's not true then? Do you have a list of the authors and their qualifications at time of writing the studies ?
Temperatures may go down as well as up terms and conditions apply.
re:What 'truth' are you talking about? The 'claim' that some of the IPCC reports may have been initially written by relatively unqualified people may be true but is, of course, irrelevant because those reports are circulated and circulated again to many really qualified scientists before they are published. Of course, in such a diverse scientific organisation, and which is allowed to, and even recommended to, study information from non-peer-reviewed sources, some mistakes will occur.So it's not true then?
With respect to the WUWT article, what is their purpose in such a pointless article? Undoubtedly to imply the IPCC can't be trusted to give the 'true' scientific consensus on the current Global Warming and therefore is a commie UN NWO conspiracy. IMO, one has to be of extremely low intellect to agree with that.
The 'truth' I was assuming in my earlier post, was your 'personal search for truth' in the subject of Climate Change. So, where in the said article does it give peer-reviewed 'scientific' fact to dispute the humungeous consensus of AGW ?
If I have misunderstood your 'personal search for truth' then I apologise - and if so please define it in easily understood terms for any of us here to discuss amicably.
Denial is a defense mechanism in which a person is faced with a fact that is too uncomfortable to accept and rejects it instead, insisting that it is not true despite what may be overwhelming evidence.
Denial is a mechanism of the immature mind, because it conflicts with the ability to learn from and cope with reality.
A mistake is not acceptable if the economic future of a country is to be based on any such reports. I would also expect those that write the reports are suitably qualified.
Temperatures may go down as well as up terms and conditions apply.
As my late great friend Tommy used to say:Originally Posted by manbearpig
"The man who never made a mistake never made anything."
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks