Apr 14

Well, the UN IPPC’s report card is out for its Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), and a citizen audit has given it 21 grades of F:

21 of 44 chapters in the United Nations’ Nobel-winning climate bible earned an F on a report card we are releasing today. Forty citizen auditors from 12 countries examined 18,531 sources cited in the report – finding 5,587 to be not peer-reviewed.

Contrary to statements by the chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the celebrated 2007 report does not rely solely on research published in reputable scientific journals. It also cites press releases, newspaper and magazine clippings, working papers, student theses, discussion papers, and literature published by green advocacy groups. Such material is often called “grey literature.”

We’ve been told this report is the gold standard. We’ve been told it’s 100 percent peer-reviewed science. But thousands of sources cited by this report have not come within a mile of a scientific journal.

Meantime, more than two months after this blog reported it, Real Climate is still laughably touting the IPCC reports on their page of global warming resources:

“You can’t do better than the IPCC reports themselves”

5 people like this post.

Possibly Related Posts:


Share
Tagged with:
Feb 16

As Glaciergate was breaking, I believe I was the first to call for the Nobel Committee to revoke Al Gore’s and the UN IPCC’s share Nobel Peace Prize, despite the fact that Nobel rules prohibit revocation of the Nobel Peace Prize. I said, “Screw it, set a new precedent!

Fast forward a few weeks (and a few more IPCC fill-in-the-blank-”gates”) and momentum seems to be building a bit more for revocation of Gore’s and the IPCC’s award:

1. This video surfaced on YouTube:

2. An on-line petition has started demanding to “Strip Al Gore and The UN IPCC of Their Nobel Prize and Award It Instead to The Much More Deserving Irena Sendler:

Al Gore and The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UN IPCC) shared a Nobel Peace Prize
in 2007. Since receiving the award, a UK court has ruled that An Inconvenient Truth, the work for which Al Gore received his half of the prize, contained nine factual errors.

Recently, it was discovered that the UN IPCC 2007 Report, the work for which the IPCC received its half of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize, contained false information regarding the risk of glacier melt, species extinction, sea-level rise
and natural disaster in an effort to frighten the public and goad politicians into taking action. By signing this petition, you are sending a clear message that you wish for Al Gore and the UN IPCC to be stripped of their 2007 award.

In signing, you are also asking that the 2007 prize to Irena Sendler who risked her life daily during WWII to ultimately rescue more than 2,500 Jewish children from the Nazis.  Irena Sendler was among those up for the Prize in 2007 that the much less deserving Gore and IPCC won for political reasons.

3. The Donald has spoken:

Tycoon Donald Trump, citing the East Coast’s massive snowstorms, says former Vice President Al Gore should be stripped of his Nobel Peace Prize, according to the New York Post.

The paper reports that the billionaire told about 500 members of his Trump National Golf Club in Westchester, N.Y.:

With the coldest winter ever recorded, with snow setting record levels up and down the coast, the Nobel committee should take the Nobel Prize back from Al Gore.

Gore wants us to clean up our factories and plants in order to protect us from global warming, when China and other countries couldn’t care less. It would make us totally noncompetitive in the manufacturing world, and China, Japan and India are laughing at America’s stupidity.

When will the Nobel Committee take action and revoke this award which was buillt on an elaborate lie? Not until hell freezes over.

8 people like this post.

Possibly Related Posts:


Share
Tagged with:
Feb 06

Um, it might be time for the Hockey Team to edit that page a bit.

9 people like this post.

Possibly Related Posts:


Share
Tagged with:
Feb 04

Mr. President, last week I urged you to call out the UN IPCC to keep your inaugural pledge to “restore science to its rightful place”.  You didn’t.

This week India has set an excellent precedent for restoring scientific integrity by pulling out of the IPCC because they “cannot rely” on that body due to the many false claims contained in IPCC AR4 that have recently come to light.

And so Mr. President, you have another opportunity to stand behind another, but very similar pledge that you made shortly after your inauguration:

…I am also signing a Presidential Memorandum directing the head of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy to develop a strategy for restoring scientific integrity to government decision making. To ensure that in this new Administration, we base our public policies on the soundest science; that we appoint scientific advisors based on their credentials and experience, not their politics or ideology; and that we are open and honest with the American people about the science behind our decisions.

I know that this puts you in a tough place, Mr. President.  It’s a lot easier to make these promises when you are on the campaign trail, than it is to keep them when it’s your butt sitting in the Oval Office, isn’t it? But, they were promises just the same.  What will you do? We’re waiting, Mr. President.

7 people like this post.

Possibly Related Posts:


Share
Tagged with:
Feb 04

Via the UK’s Telegraph:

The Indian government has established its own body to monitor the effects of global warming because it “cannot rely” on the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the group headed by its own Nobel prize-winning scientist Dr R.K Pachauri.

The move is a significant snub to both the IPCC and Dr Pachauri as he battles to defend his reputation following the revelation that his most recent climate change report included false claims that most of the Himalayan glaciers would melt away by 2035. Scientists believe it could take more than 300 years for the glaciers to disappear.

In India the false claims have heightened tensions between Dr Pachauri and the government, which had earlier questioned his glacial melting claims. In Autumn, its environment minister Mr Jairam Ramesh said while glacial melting in the Himalayas was a real concern, there was evidence that some were actually advancing despite global warming.

He announced the Indian government will established a separate National Institute of Himalayan Glaciology to monitor the effects of climate change on the world’s ‘third ice cap’, and an ‘Indian IPCC’ to use ‘climate science’ to assess the impact of global warming throughout the country.

“There is a fine line between climate science and climate evangelism. I am for climate science. I think people misused [the] IPCC report, [the] IPCC doesn’t do the original research which is one of the weaknesses… they just take published literature and then they derive assessments, so we had goof-ups on Amazon forest, glaciers, snow peaks.

Love it! They are saying to to group think and junk science. Hopefully this is a tipping point that causes the collapse of the IPCC.

5 people like this post.

Possibly Related Posts:


Share
Tagged with:
Jan 26

From the YouTube notes:

Dr. RK Pachauri of the IPCC/TERI tells the BBC January 25, 2010 “I’m here to stay” refusing to take responsibility for the false data included in the IPCC AR4 with the absurd claim Himalayan Glaciers disappearing by 2035, the same false claim that was used to secure large amounts of funding from the EU and the Carnegie Company.

4 people like this post.

Possibly Related Posts:


Share
Tagged with:
Jan 23

Via Nobelprize.org’s FAQ:

Is it possible to revoke a Nobel Prize?

No, it is not possible according to the statutes of the Nobel Foundation, § 10.

With the report today of a UN scientist’s frank admission that false data regarding Himalayan glaciers was used in the UN IPCC’s AR4, if there ever was a case for a Nobel Peace Prize to be revoked, this is it!

It’s time for the Nobel Committe to swallow their pride and set a new precedent by revoking the UN IPCC”s and Al Gore’s Nobel Peace Prize, and save some shred of what little credibility they have left.

18 people like this post.

Possibly Related Posts:


Share
Tagged with:
preload preload preload