Climate Change Fraud Continues To Be Exposed

The biggest fraud in our lifetime is being exposed. Imagine, the charlatan, liar, and crook, Al Gore almost was elected President of the USA. Talk about dodging a bullet! I think it is time for the U.S. to pull out of the United Nations. Kick these con-artists out of New York City. Send them someplace where they would be welcome, like Cuba, or Venezuela, or North Korea.
Peter


More Questionable Material Found in U.N. Climate Report
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
By Patrick Goodenough, International Editor
Source

IPCC publicity material circulated in media prior to the release of the 2007 Fourth Assessment report (Image: IPCC)(CNSNews.com) – The U.N. climate report that contains an erroneous claim on the rate of glacier retreat also includes references to studies not originating from peer-reviewed scientific literature, some of them linked to environmental activists.

A review of references listed in the four-volume 2007 U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report shows that it includes reports linked to various green groups, including WWF and Greenpeace.

The IPCC has now admitted that the report contains a “poorly substantiated” prediction that Himalayan glaciers will disappear by 2035.

The glacier claim originated from a 1999 news report that apparently misrepresented one non peer-reviewed study, was reproduced in a 2005 report by the WWF advocacy group, and then – despite a supposedly exhaustive drafting the reviewing process – found its way into the IPCC report.

IPCC defenders have accused critics of blowing out of proportion a single small mistake in a huge document. IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri also noted that it was just “one” error in a 938-page report.

But researchers digging into the document have begun to find other questionable assertions too, again attributed to non-peer-reviewed sources.

-- British investigative researcher Dr. Richard North found a claim in the report that “up to 40% of the Amazonian forests could react drastically to even a slight reduction in precipitation.”

The reference cited by IPCC for this claim was a 2000 report produced by WWF in conjunction with another advocacy group, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). The two authors are a policy analyst and “forest fire management specialist” who works for IUCN and WWF, and an investigative journalist.

-- Ben Pile, co-author of Climate Resistance, noted that an assertion in the same IPCC report that climate change could contribute to reducing rain-based crop yield in Africa by 50 percent by 2020 had originated from a report by another advocacy organization, the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD).

The IPCC report in the spotlight was one of four released in a series of high-profile events during 2007, and together known as the Fourth Assessment Report. It was six years in the making, and the IPCC said in publicity material at the time that it was the work of more than 2,500 scientific expert reviewers, more than 800 contributing authors and 450 lead authors from more than 130 countries.

The Fourth Assessment Report has been used to guide governments in determining climate policies affecting hundreds of millions of people, and by advocacy groups in pressing governments to do more. The IPCC is currently working on its Fifth Assessment Report, and on Jan. 15 opened nominations for authors and reviewers. It is due to be finalized in 2014.

The reliance of peer-reviewed material – material that has been scrutinized by other experts in the same scientific field – is aimed at minimizing the likelihood that unsound assertions can make their way into IPCC reports.

Although the IPCC’s procedures for compiling reports do permit the use of “selected non-peer reviewed literature,” they also stress that the “source, quality and validity of non-peer reviewed literature, such as private sector information need to be critically assessed by the authors.”

The IPCC in 2007 shared the Nobel peace prize with global warming advocate Al Gore. In the wake of controversies dogging the U.N. body, some critics are now calling for the award to be rescinded or returned. (I second this opinion, Peter)

“To restore its credibility, the IPCC should return its half of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize and replace its current leadership,” National Center for Public Policy Research president Amy Ridenour said. The move would “signal to the world that the IPCC is serious about reform.”

Ridenour said if the body did not take that and other steps in response to the recent developments, “the Obama Administration should use its influence to have it shut down.”