IPCC "ignores an entire field of science"

Rotten to the core

Why should that surprise anyone? The IPCC isn’t a scientific organisation, impartially sifting through and collating the current state of climate research to seek the truth, it is a political one, established for the sole purpose of finding evidence to support a pre-determined conclusion reached back in the 1980s, namely that man-made CO2 was causing dangerous climate change.

Why else would the IPCC include acres of grey literature, the majority of it from environmental advocacy groups, and the majority of it tending to make the case against CO2 stronger, yet exclude much peer-reviewed (for what that’s worth) research which questions the influence of CO2 relative to other factors? Why else would virtually every error discovered in the IPCC reports tend to exaggerate the seriousness of the crisis? Why else would many lead authors be permitted to be closely involved with environmental organisations like WWF and Friends of the Earth whilst carrying out their duties for the IPCC? Why else would Rajendra Pachauri, the head of the IPCC, be seen regularly advocating particular policy outcomes, such as reduction of emissions, which assume a particular scientific conclusion?

When one stops deluding oneself that the IPCC is a scientific organisation and appreciates that it is a political organisation, rotten to the core, all the above make perfect sense.

In Germany, where the sceptic movement has received considerable publicity over the past week or so, thanks to Fritz Vahrenholt’s new book, The Cold Sun, newspaper Die Welt publishes a damning indictment of the IPCC, in an editorial entitled Climate science is the new replacement religion:

Very few people have recognised that in the research that Vahrenholt und Lüning are referring to has nothing to do with the irradiative heating of the sun, which indeed does not fluctuate much, but with the solar winds which are increasingly shown to have an indirect impact on cloud formation, and thus influence the climate.

The IPCC has looked at this on the fringes and have determined that this research – which the renwoned CERN institute and others are carrying out -– is not far enough to allow conclusions to be drawn.

That may or may not be the case. But the fact remains that the IPCC, which is responsible for bringing the scientists together, still has not gotten the idea to invite these scientists for its large climate reports. Why not? After all it’s the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and not the Intergovernmental Panel on CO2.”

As No Tricks Zone goes on to say:

The positive feedbacks ASSUMED for CO2 with respect to water vapour are also very poorly understood. Yet the IPCC has no problems inflating those and including them in their climate reports.

Source link from No Tricks Zone.

Google Translate version of Die Welt editorial is here.


  1. Verdict first, evidence later.

  2. The UN, more than anything else, wants to be a global beauracracy with the power to tax and write rules, kind of like an EU for everybody. The IPCC’s job is to drum up the catastrophe (real or imagined) that will require a global governance to fix. If in the next decade mother nature proves anthropronenic climate change from green houses gases overblown with a rather quick decent into a cooler world courtesy of a quite sun, they won’t need or bother to change the name but they will continue to insist we need global governance by the UN to handle the problem.

  3. Vivienne Skeen via Facebook says:

    Global warming/climate change has never been about science, AGW has been a scam from the beginning, to bring about the United Nations & the Central Bankers aim of a World Government, Politicians from all Nations are a part of that scam, you know that by the fact they have gone along hook line and sinker & continue to do so in light of the mountain of evidence that AGW is a fraud. I’m stating the obvious here I know. The UN was brought into existence for one reason only, to bring about a World Government. WAKE UP!

  4. I was a sceptical on Global Warming no i am a believer, Middle of Feb. And i am driving wth heater on in car. Sydney hailstones Europe deep freeze like never b4. Yep i am now a believer we need global warming to thaw out. Bob Brown u r a [snip] and alarmist, i won’t say what else on this forum.

  5. Flannery is the dumb brains behind our Federal government. Everything he has been paid to utter has been proven, beyond doubt, to be nothing more tham absolute fiction.

  6. Blair Giles via Facebook says:

    Since it was first pointed out to me, I have been (and continue to be) astounded that the IPCC gave such a strong weighting to the power of clouds (in that a 1% change in albedo could have the same effect as a doubling of CO2), and then turned around to completely ignore them in their summary reports.

    When people ask how I dare to question scientists, I find it easy to point at this fact and say, “When I can see that they have evidence that questions the conclusions, and they clearly deliberately ignore it, I know that not a word they say can be trusted.”

  7. Dan Harlow Chapman via Facebook says:

    AGW Man-made Global Warming is a busted myth, made by man, the end…http://news.thomasnet.com/green_clean/2012/02/10/five-points-about-global-warming/

%d bloggers like this: