Posted on 02/25/2010 6:24:29 PM PST by neverdem
In the next few days, the world's leading authority on global warming plans to roll out a strategy to tackle a tough problem: restoring its own bruised reputation.
A months-long crisis at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has upended the world's perception of global warming, after hacked emails and other disclosures revealed deep divisions among scientists working with the United Nation-sponsored group. That has raised questions about the panel's objectivity in assessing one of today's most hotly debated scientific fields.
The problem stems from the IPCC's thorny mission: To take sophisticated and sometimes inconclusive science, and boil it down to usable advice for lawmakers. To meet that goal, scientists working with the IPCC say they sometimes faced institutional bias toward oversimplification, a Wall Street Journal examination shows.
Richard Alley, a geoscientist who helped write the IPCC's latest report, issued in 2007, described a trip that summer to Greenland's ice sheet with senators who urged him to be as specific as possible about the potential for sea-level rise. The point many of them made, he said: Give more explicit advice—because, if the sea rises, "the levee has to be built some height."
The tension within the IPCC stretches back a decade or more, according to interviews with scientists and a review of hundreds of IPCC documents and emails. It has complicated the panel's work on matters ranging from the study of tree rings to the proper use of massively complex climate computer models.
To restore its credibility, the IPCC will focus on enforcing rules already on the books, IPCC Chairman Rajendra Pachauri...
--snip--
The hockey-stick chart is "the textbook example" of "how difficult the job really is" to summarize the full report, said Mr. Stocker, one of the top scientists overseeing the IPCC's next report, due in 2013 and 2014...
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
It's over boys! The world isn't buying your lying BS anymore!
hopefully will never be written. Time for this loathsome diseased relic (IPCC) to drag itself off to the elephants graveyard.
Global Warming simplified: There is ZERO evidence in the geologic record that CO2 at levels anywhere near as low as we have today has ever resulted in global temperature increases. None.
Close the operation down and send Rajendra back to “the subcontinent.”
These ASSHATS at the UN should be DRAGGED AWAY IN HANDCUFFS!!!
(PaMom intoning her best Bones McCoy) “its dead Jim.”
Fascinating:
Mr. Alley walked that tightrope in helping write the chapter covering his specialty: the degree to which massive Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets might melt, raising sea levels. The problem, he said: “Ice-sheet models are not very good.”
Many conversations with policy makers world-wide—including Mr. Gore, the senators on the Greenland trip and Christian Gaudin, a French senator—left the clear impression that “we scientists had better get better numbers,” said Mr. Alley, adding that he understands their need for detail.
So the scientists put numbers into the 2007 study, along with a big caveat—what Mr. Alley calls a “punt.” The study took into account things like glacier melt in most of the world, but it noted that it excluded what’s happening in the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, which “we can’t predict,” Mr. Alley said.
Inevitably, Mr. Alley said, some people have quoted the numbers without mentioning that caveat
Still, the article gives plenty of support to AGW. What is wrong with journalists? Are they just lazy? Can they not read the information that’s available?
For example, they show a graph with the temperature ramping up, and in the notes they tell you that it represents actual temperature measurements. No discussion about the culling of colder temperature sensors and the heat island effect, both tending to bias the “actual” temperature readings to higher temperatures.
And they quote Marburger, and bolster his “credibility” by saying he was a George W. Bush advisor. As if we should swallow his BS because of that.
I think it might possibly be conjectured that a problematic series of non-causal relationships will coordinate in a non-specific temporal pseudo chaotic single step monotonic series such that the even eigen values sum to np completeness.
Now give me six, no, seven million dollars.
Barny - perfect!
Someone needs to introduce the IPCC scientists to error bars - and probably show them how they’re used.
Of course that approach only helps if the researchers are honest and objective.
The "journalists" in the news section of the Wall Street Journal are like the rest in the state run media.
An inadvertent admission that they are lying. Telling the truth is quite easy and not difficult at all.
Investigate and incaecerate the whole lot: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2458674/posts
Uh, incarcerate.
UN to review controversial climate panel (IPCC now under independent review) ^
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.
