Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Top British scientist says IPCC is losing credibility
The Sunday Times ^ | February 7, 2010 | Jonathan Leake

Posted on 02/06/2010 8:13:17 PM PST by ricks_place

A LEADING British government scientist has warned the United Nations’ climate panel to tackle its blunders or lose all credibility.

Robert Watson, chief scientist at Defra, the environment ministry, who chaired the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) from 1997 to 2002, was speaking after more potential inaccuracies emerged in the IPCC’s 2007 benchmark report on global warming.

The most important is a claim that global warming could cut rain-fed north African crop production by up to 50% by 2020, a remarkably short time for such a dramatic change. The claim has been quoted in speeches by Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC chairman, and by Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary-general.

This weekend Professor Chris Field, the new lead author of the IPCC’s climate impacts team, told The Sunday Times that he could find nothing in the report to support the claim. The revelation follows the IPCC’s retraction of a claim that the Himalayan glaciers might all melt by 2035.

The African claims could be even more embarrassing for the IPCC because they appear not only in its report on climate change impacts but, unlike the glaciers claim, are also repeated in its Synthesis Report.

This report is the IPCC’s most politically sensitive publication, distilling its most important science into a form accessible to politicians and policy makers. Its lead authors include Pachauri himself.

...

Speaking this weekend, Field said: “I was not an author on the Synthesis Report but on reading it I cannot find support for the statement about African crop yield declines.”

...

(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: globalwarming; ipcc
Surprise, much of the IPCC Nobel Prize Winning Report is not just based on bad science but on no science at all. Pachauri fabricated a fantastic fable! Rajendra Pachauri must resign. The entire IPCC must resign.
1 posted on 02/06/2010 8:13:17 PM PST by ricks_place
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ricks_place; Defendingliberty; WL-law; Normandy; TenthAmendmentChampion; FrPR; enough_idiocy; ...
 



Beam Me to Planet Gore !

2 posted on 02/06/2010 8:14:51 PM PST by steelyourfaith (FReepers were opposed to Obama even before it was cool to be against Obama.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ricks_place

Losing credibility?


3 posted on 02/06/2010 8:22:08 PM PST by Man50D (Fair Tax, you earn it, you keep it! www.FairTaxNation.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ricks_place
None of this really is a surprise. The IPCC is a political organization, not a scientific one, established over twenty years ago to frame up the rationale for government takeovers of significant elements of the world economies. The large majority of the so-called "2500 scientists" are not scientists at all, but government bureaucrats and political operatives.
4 posted on 02/06/2010 8:27:19 PM PST by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ricks_place

Idiots and liars all of them. Higher CO2 levels and warmer climate means more food, not less. And as all the AGW believers remind us every day now, Global Warmer causes more precipitation, apparently.


5 posted on 02/06/2010 8:47:53 PM PST by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: justa-hairyape

Warmer=Warming


6 posted on 02/06/2010 8:49:06 PM PST by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ricks_place

Pre-meditated fraud from UNaccountable bureaucrats? Go figure.


7 posted on 02/06/2010 8:49:28 PM PST by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PGalt

BFL


8 posted on 02/06/2010 8:50:12 PM PST by editor-surveyor (Democracy, the vilest form of government, pits the greed of an angry mob vs. the rights of a man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ricks_place

They are only losing credibility in the same way that Britney Spears is losing her high moral standards.


9 posted on 02/06/2010 8:53:10 PM PST by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

BFL


10 posted on 02/06/2010 9:03:16 PM PST by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ricks_place
"Top British scientist says IPCC is losing credibility"


11 posted on 02/06/2010 9:05:54 PM PST by Mad Dawgg (If you're going to deny my 1st Amendment rights then I must proceed to the next one...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: justa-hairyape; SunkenCiv; Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Global Warmer causes more precipitation, apparently.

Warmer=Warming

You had it right before the ‘correction’.

Every Global Warmer is causing more precipitation from their lachrymal glands, as more and more tatters appear in their narrative.

12 posted on 02/07/2010 12:28:55 AM PST by ApplegateRanch (I think not, therefore I don't exist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ricks_place
IPCC is losing credibility

In other news, Paris Hilton is losing her reputation as an intellectual:

13 posted on 02/07/2010 2:04:08 AM PST by Pollster1 (Natural born citizen of the USA, with the birth certificate to prove it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1
.

Paris Hilton has more credibility reading Sub Tsu's Art of War than Rajendra Pachauri penning sexed up Return to Almora. It would be much more plausible to discover Paris filming a sexed up video and Rajendra failing a course on Art of War!

14 posted on 02/07/2010 7:15:09 AM PST by ricks_place
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ricks_place

Just like the person that has been embezzling from their company for a long period of time and has become over confident because they have not gotten caught. At the end they had become so arrogant and had so much power they thought they could get away with using circular quoting because they had successfully blackballed legitmate scientific studies and could make up anything they wanted.

IPPC would quote the journals(which are funded by those wanting global socialism) which would quote Scientist A who would quote scientist B would quote IPPC.


15 posted on 02/07/2010 8:45:24 AM PST by ODDITHER (HAT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson