in the wrong era. Soundly refuting
liberals online since 2000.
| Free Beacon | 0 | |
| AP | 0 | |
| Power Line | 0 | |
| B’berg | 2012 Watch: Gingrich Seeks to Ease Fundraising Woes as Las Vegas Checks Slowing Down |
0 |
| The Hill | Scandal: Pelosi might have skirted House ethics rules on campaign solicitations |
0 |
Audacity of Truth
Gaffetastic:
Vice President Joe Biden had his “oops” moment Wednesday speaking in a 49er-crazed SF when he told a crowd at a city political fundraiser that “the Giants are on their way to the Super Bowl.” - SF Chronicle, 1-18-12
Al Gore doesn’t want to debate global warming
Jonathan Adler at the Volokh Conspiracy linked to a subscribers-only op/ed piece at the WSJ written by Jyllands-Posten culture editor Fleming Rose and Bjorn Lomborg on Al Gore’s refusal to debate global warming. Rose and Lomborg wrote (emphasis added):
The interview [with Gore] had been scheduled for months. Mr. Gore’s agent yesterday thought Gore-meets-Lomborg would be great. Yet an hour later, he came back to tell us that Bjorn Lomborg should be excluded from the interview because he’s been very critical of Mr. Gore’s message about global warming and has questioned Mr. Gore’s evenhandedness. According to the agent, Mr. Gore only wanted to have questions about his book and documentary, and only asked by a reporter. These conditions were immediately accepted by Jyllands-Posten. Yet an hour later we received an email from the agent saying that the interview was now cancelled. What happened?
One can only speculate. But if we are to follow Mr. Gore’s suggestions of radically changing our way of life, the costs are not trivial. If we slowly change our greenhouse gas emissions over the coming century, the U.N. actually estimates that we will live in a warmer but immensely richer world. However, the U.N. Climate Panel suggests that if we follow Al Gore’s path down toward an environmentally obsessed society, it will have big consequences for the world, not least its poor. In the year 2100, Mr. Gore will have left the average person 30% poorer, and thus less able to handle many of the problems we will face, climate change or no climate change.
[...]
Al Gore is on a mission. If he has his way, we could end up choosing a future, based on dubious claims, that could cost us, according to a U.N. estimate, $553 trillion over this century. Getting answers to hard questions is not an unreasonable expectation before we take his project seriously. It is crucial that we make the right decisions posed by the challenge of global warming. These are best achieved through open debate, and we invite him to take the time to answer our questions: We are ready to interview you any time, Mr. Gore — and anywhere.
But know-it-all Al would rather you just take his word for it. I guess he finds being questioned about his statements on global warming to be – well – inconvenient.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Trackbacks
70 Responses to “Al Gore doesn’t want to debate global warming”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Island of Misfit Bloggers
Stats
Bob wrote, “Of course it’s a silly argument to make that we need to be experts in every field to make informed decisions on government policy.
No. We as expert Bob’s can discount substance with a slight of hand. And in the same paragraph make the argument that those receiving government grants to do research or clean as the wind driven snow. Look Bob. I’ll just assume you are naive on that one but your negligence that you showed Severian after all of his due diligence was arrogant. Sentence after sentence with substance and you didn’t deal with one sentence. Merely wave it off. Ignore it. It’s they typical liberal way. We’ve seen it here before Bob. Did you know that? We hope for an actual conversation one day.
Bob wrote, “and that they all agree that global warming caused by human-generated greenhouse gasses is a real phenomenon.”
And others don’t Bob. That’s why it’s NOT consensus. There is real peer reviewed articles who measure the sun’s output and Severian gave you them. You dismissed them with a wave of the hand. Good JOB!!! You did due diligence. Climatologists don’t deal with sun output. They deal with “computer models” that turn out to be inaccurate every time. Truly. They and you can FEEL and AGREE with each other and FEEL some more but if you don’t accept input from others then how open minded are you truly. Can I refer to you as CM Bob (Close Minded Bob?) Or will you be different from here on out? EVERY ONE HERE has seen the climatologists’ reports and articles that you show us. It is pushed on us by the dominant media. We are open minded and have considered the input. It is part of a larger scale of data. History over 1,000′s of years as Severian wrote about. Sun output. Ocean output. Contradicting evidence from other scientific points of view that climatologists don’t even consider (and neither does CM Bob).
CM Bob wrote dishonestly, “But if you’d rather scrap 100 years of scientific discovery”
No Bob. Nobody is asking to scrap 100 years of scientific discovery. We are all asking you to consider other fields and you call them crackpot because Bob is not only close minded but judgmental. CMJ Bob? OK. Really I’m having fun and you can do the name calling to. I don’t mind. The wit is intended to get you to think about what you are doing. But you can close your mind to that to.
CMJ Bob wrote, “constantly stroking each other.
Because we respect each other because we are a tag team of very intelligent people with great common sense. We’ve been around. We’ve debated greater than you. You CMJ Bob need to step up to the plate better with more due diligence.
CMJ Bob wrote, “Do you call each other up for mutual support when one of you faces a challenge?”
Nah. We are tough guys. Never even met each other. Each of us are great in our fields. I’ve read 1,000′s of pages of articles during and since my conversion from liberalism in 1991. We aren’t small potatoes yet we aren’t getting each of our sentences peer reviewed
Little CMJ Bob humor there.
ST wrote, “I can assure you, a ‘coordinated effort’ isn’t needed by any of them. –ST”
Same to you sis !
Lorica asked, “In the world of science it is well known that the earth has been warmer than it is today, so my question is what happened then?? ”
Um. I’ll ingore the question. I don’t deal with substance buddy.
Lorica affirmed what I’ve been saying by writing, “Since the majority of the science you linked to refuses to take into account the fossil record,”
Wup. I gotta go to my 8:00 meeting. Se ya’ll later
Well, I see there’s nothing new from Bob. And on the same day the headlines are reading “Did Scientists Oversell Global Warming.” Heh.
Notice the ever changing standards: First it’s “No one dissents, everyone agrees.” Then when shown that’s not true, it’s “The people who disagree aren’t scientists and are hacks.” When shown that scientists disagree, even climatologists, it’s “They’re paid off by the oil companies and there are no peer reviewed articles doubting AGW.” Then when shown peer reviewed papers, it’s “There aren’t enough of them.” When it starts cooling what will be the excuse then? “I never believed it” will probably be it.
Sigh. This type of “argument” is typical of liberals. No WMDs at all, then when found, they are old and “safe” etc.
At any rate, I read an interesting article for those of you who’d like to read it:
Is there linkage between increasing solar activity and increasing global temperatures?
Sev states:
First it’s “No one dissents, everyone agrees.”
You will assimilate and think like we tell you to think or we will yank your credentials, so says the Weather Channel.
In the Weather Channel’s world, its ..think like we tell you too, or else.
Why are Global warming alamrists so threatened by debate and different ideas? Al Gore, can you answer that pleae? Al? Did anyone see where Al Gore went? We can’t seem to find him when it comes to having a debate of ideas and theories………How Inconvienent.
Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated.” – Al Gore of Borg
Algore changes his name to Bob.
What perfect timing . . . I knew the peanut gallery would appreciate this latest news from AP:
Did you knuckleheads get that? This report was compiled by 600 scientists, and then reviewed by 600 more. What puny scraps of propaganda can you offer in the face of this? What will JunkScience.com have to say? What about the hockey stick? We’ll anxiously await your personal inspection and independent analysis of their data when the document arrives, Severian. Don’t let us down.
What’s wrong, did the news about the IPCC’s new report demoralize you guys or something? Severian, are you hard at work crunching the numbers for your rebuttal? Did you catch the part about how the report has 1,600 pages? That must represent an awful lot of man-hours of research. How long will it take, Severian, for you and the two guys at JunkScience.com to come up with an equivalent body of work to prove them all wrong? You’re way deep in the hole. You’d better get busy.
By the way, I also read the following today:
My, my, my. The consensus just keeps getting stronger, and you guys seem to be stuck farther and farther out to sea on a rapidly melting ice berg.
Of course, it’s entirely possible that these USACP companies are pushing the government for new envrionmental regulations solely for the purpose of crippling their competitors and increasing their own market share. Color me skeptical.
There’s something fishy about any group that calls for increased government regulation while simultaneously claiming to lay out a blueprint for “mandatory, economy-wide, market-driven” controls. Whenever you hear that, your BS detector should be going off loud and long.
There is precedent, GWR, for some environmental groups like the Natural Resources Defense Council to work with industry on sincere efforts to reduce pollution. If I’m not mistaken, they did a collaboration with McDonalds to get rid of the old styrofoam “clam shell” containers in favor of paper and cardboard. It’s the kind of win-win, “market-based” approach than should warm the hearts of conservatives and liberals alike.
Correction: It was the Environmental Defense Fund, not the NRDC, who worked with McDonalds.
Bob’s masters have spoken again. To whit, I point you a the following:
Stephan Schneider … teaches at Stanford University….” and is the author of several IPCC chapters.
“.. to get the public’s attention we have to draw up shocking scenarios using simple and dramatic statements. Possible doubts should only marginally be considered. Everyone needs to find the right balance between honesty and effectivity.” (23)
So, one of the main authors of the last IPCC report admits that lying is OK if it’s for a “good” cause, and you still want to believe everything they say without question. The pro-AGW people are getting more and more aggressive as the science underlying this gets shakier and shakier. But not to worry, people like Bob will believe no matter what, and help them push their socialist utopian ideals of massive wealth redistribution on us all. God help us.
And again Bob, when you can come back with one intelligent question about the actual science instead of bleating it’s consensus it has to be right, then you’ll be worth talking with. Of if you address the question of if they are so confident of their science why are they trying to silence discussion and debate? What are they afraid of, there may be something you say worth listening to.
You really do a parrot impression remarkably well. Try coming up with an original thought, I know it’s hard for liberals, but try it, you’ll find it liberating.
Did you catch the part about how the report has 1,600 pages?
In Bob’s simple, untrained mind, that must mean something! You’re judging a not yet released report and assigning it a lot of credibility just because of it’s size?!?
Early in my career I had a document sent back to me for more work because it wasn’t “long” enough. I was told, in no uncertain terms, that it had to be much longer to both 1) look “serious and scientifically sound” and 2) because that way fewer people would read anything other than the abstract and conclusion and there’d be less arguments about it that way. So, color me unimpressed.
And one last comment, the IPCC, brought to you by the UN, the same agency that brought you the Oil For Food scandal and child sex rings around the world. Yeah, that’s credibility for you.
Makes me wonder, if Bob’s such a believer, what has he done to reduce his carbon footprint? Stopped driving so much? Turned his thermostat settings to save energy? Or is he like most liberals, and expects the government to force others to do it?
Severian likes to pretend that nit-picking individual bits of data, like Mann’s original “hockey stick” chart, or questioning the motives of a researcher here or there because of one unclear or ambiguous statement they once made, while ignoring the overwhelming body of independent data collected by other scientists that supports global warming, is either an honest or typical way of disproving a scientific theory.
This is the same approach that people who deny the theory of evolution often take. Scientists are constantly questioning and refining the details of the theory, even while completely accepting all of its basic premises. For example, does evolution proceed in a continuous or temporally punctuated manner? These are honest questions that real scientists ask, and their motive is to try to come as close to the truth as possible. But hacks with dishonest political agendas often use this quest for truth against the science, by trying to claim that questioning and refining the details means that the basic premise is in doubt. I refer back to the article from Science, where the author states:
Severian’s excruciatingly swollen ego notwithstanding, this debate is not about him or me. It’s about the overwhelming body of data, and the overwhelming majority of scientists around the world who work in this field, who are convinced that human-caused global warming is a serious problem. Try as they might, the tremendously powerful forces who want to deny the reality of global warming can do nothing more than nit-pick the science. Despite their enormous political power and financial resources, they have been unable to fill their own 1,600 page volume with data and analysis to rebut the scientific consensus. Since they can’t win on a playing field where only facts matter, they have tried to do an end-run around the science by mounting a huge PR campaign to create their own fictional world where facts don’t matter.
I have to say, Severian, that I think you’re flailing here. I think all of the personal attacks against me—as if it mattered or I really cared—are the kind of thing that an angry and threatened person does. You’re backed into a corner and trying to hide your insecurity behind a façade of arrogance and bluster. As I said, you have a lot of catching up to do to make any kind of case for what your side is trying to claim. You really need to get going here, and the personal attacks are just wasting time. If the world needs your undivided talents as much as you seem to think it does, then you’re letting us all down.
An open letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper:
Dear Prime Minister:
As accredited experts in climate and related scientific disciplines, we are writing to propose that balanced, comprehensive public-consultation sessions be held so as to examine the scientific foundation of the federal government’s climate-change plans. This would be entirely consistent with your recent commitment to conduct a review of the Kyoto Protocol. Although many of us made the same suggestion to then-prime ministers Martin and Chretien, neither responded, and, to date, no formal, independent climate-science review has been conducted in Canada. Much of the billions of dollars earmarked for implementation of the protocol in Canada will be squandered without a proper assessment of recent developments in climate science.
Observational evidence does not support today’s computer climate models, so there is little reason to trust model predictions of the future. Yet this is precisely what the United Nations did in creating and promoting Kyoto and still does in the alarmist forecasts on which Canada’s climate policies are based. Even if the climate models were realistic, the environmental impact of Canada delaying implementation of Kyoto or other greenhouse-gas reduction schemes, pending completion of consultations, would be insignificant. Directing your government to convene balanced, open hearings as soon as possible would be a most prudent and responsible course of action.
While the confident pronouncements of scientifically unqualified environmental groups may provide for sensational headlines, they are no basis for mature policy formulation. The study of global climate change is, as you have said, an “emerging science,” one that is perhaps the most complex ever tackled. It may be many years yet before we properly understand the Earth’s climate system. Nevertheless, significant advances have been made since the protocol was created, many of which are taking us away from a concern about increasing greenhouse gases. If, back in the mid-1990s, we knew what we know today about climate, Kyoto would almost certainly not exist, because we would have concluded it was not necessary.
We appreciate the difficulty any government has formulating sensible science-based policy when the loudest voices always seem to be pushing in the opposite direction. However, by convening open, unbiased consultations, Canadians will be permitted to hear from experts on both sides of the debate in the climate-science community. When the public comes to understand that there is no “consensus” among climate scientists about the relative importance of the various causes of global climate change, the government will be in a far better position to develop plans that reflect reality and so benefit both the environment and the economy.
“Climate change is real” is a meaningless phrase used repeatedly by activists to convince the public that a climate catastrophe is looming and humanity is the cause. Neither of these fears is justified. Global climate changes all the time due to natural causes and the human impact still remains impossible to distinguish from this natural “noise.” The new Canadian government’s commitment to reducing air, land and water pollution is commendable, but allocating funds to “stopping climate change” would be irrational. We need to continue intensive research into the real causes of climate change and help our most vulnerable citizens adapt to whatever nature throws at us next.
We believe the Canadian public and government decision-makers need and deserve to hear the whole story concerning this very complex issue. It was only 30 years ago that many of today’s global-warming alarmists were telling us that the world was in the midst of a global-cooling catastrophe. But the science continued to evolve, and still does, even though so many choose to ignore it when it does not fit with predetermined political agendas.
We hope that you will examine our proposal carefully and we stand willing and able to furnish you with more information on this crucially important topic.
CC: The Honourable Rona Ambrose, Minister of the Environment, and the Honourable Gary Lunn, Minister of Natural Resources
- – -
Sincerely
Dr. Ian D. Clark, professor, isotope hydrogeology and paleoclimatology, Dept. of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa
Dr. Tad Murty, former senior research scientist, Dept. of Fisheries and Oceans, former director of Australia’s National Tidal Facility and professor of earth sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide; currently adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa
Dr. R. Timothy Patterson, professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences (paleoclimatology), Carleton University, Ottawa
Dr. Fred Michel, director, Institute of Environmental Science and associate professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences, Carleton University, Ottawa
Dr. Madhav Khandekar, former research scientist, Environment Canada. Member of editorial board of Climate Research and Natural Hazards
Dr. Paul Copper, FRSC, professor emeritus, Dept. of Earth Sciences, Laurentian University, Sudbury, Ont.
Dr. Ross McKitrick, associate professor, Dept. of Economics, University of Guelph, Ont.
Dr. Tim Ball, former professor of climatology, University of Winnipeg; environmental consultant
Dr. Andreas Prokoph, adjunct professor of earth sciences, University of Ottawa; consultant in statistics and geology
Mr. David Nowell, M.Sc. (Meteorology), fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society, Canadian member and past chairman of the NATO Meteorological Group, Ottawa
Dr. Christopher Essex, professor of applied mathematics and associate director of the Program in Theoretical Physics, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.
Dr. Gordon E. Swaters, professor of applied mathematics, Dept. of Mathematical Sciences, and member, Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Research Group, University of Alberta
Dr. L. Graham Smith, associate professor, Dept. of Geography, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.
Dr. G. Cornelis van Kooten, professor and Canada Research Chair in environmental studies and climate change, Dept. of Economics, University of Victoria
Dr. Petr Chylek, adjunct professor, Dept. of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax
Dr./Cdr. M. R. Morgan, FRMS, climate consultant, former meteorology advisor to the World Meteorological Organization. Previously research scientist in climatology at University of Exeter, U.K.
Dr. Keith D. Hage, climate consultant and professor emeritus of Meteorology, University of Alberta
Dr. David E. Wojick, P.Eng., energy consultant, Star Tannery, Va., and Sioux Lookout, Ont.
Rob Scagel, M.Sc., forest microclimate specialist, principal consultant, Pacific Phytometric Consultants, Surrey, B.C.
Dr. Douglas Leahey, meteorologist and air-quality consultant, Calgary
Paavo Siitam, M.Sc., agronomist, chemist, Cobourg, Ont.
Dr. Chris de Freitas, climate scientist, associate professor, The University of Auckland, N.Z.
Dr. Richard S. Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan professor of meteorology, Dept. of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Dr. Freeman J. Dyson, emeritus professor of physics, Institute for Advanced Studies, Princeton, N.J.
Mr. George Taylor, Dept. of Meteorology, Oregon State University; Oregon State climatologist; past president, American Association of State Climatologists
Dr. Ian Plimer, professor of geology, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Adelaide; emeritus professor of earth sciences, University of Melbourne, Australia
Dr. R.M. Carter, professor, Marine Geophysical Laboratory, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia
Mr. William Kininmonth, Australasian Climate Research, former Head National Climate Centre, Australian Bureau of Meteorology; former Australian delegate to World Meteorological Organization Commission for Climatology, Scientific and Technical Review
Dr. Hendrik Tennekes, former director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute
Dr. Gerrit J. van der Lingen, geologist/paleoclimatologist, Climate Change Consultant, Geoscience Research and Investigations, New Zealand
Dr. Patrick J. Michaels, professor of environmental sciences, University of Virginia
Dr. Nils-Axel Morner, emeritus professor of paleogeophysics & geodynamics, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
Dr. Gary D. Sharp, Center for Climate/Ocean Resources Study, Salinas, Calif.
Dr. Roy W. Spencer, principal research scientist, Earth System Science Center, The University of Alabama, Huntsville
Dr. Al Pekarek, associate professor of geology, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences Dept., St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, Minn.
Dr. Marcel Leroux, professor emeritus of climatology, University of Lyon, France; former director of Laboratory of Climatology, Risks and Environment, CNRS
Dr. Paul Reiter, professor, Institut Pasteur, Unit of Insects and Infectious Diseases, Paris, France. Expert reviewer, IPCC Working group II, chapter 8 (human health)
Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski, physicist and chairman, Scientific Council of Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection, Warsaw, Poland
Dr. Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen, reader, Dept. of Geography, University of Hull, U.K.; editor, Energy & Environment
Dr. Hans H.J. Labohm, former advisor to the executive board, Clingendael Institute (The Netherlands Institute of International Relations) and an economist who has focused on climate change
Dr. Lee C. Gerhard, senior scientist emeritus, University of Kansas, past director and state geologist, Kansas Geological Survey
Dr. Asmunn Moene, past head of the Forecasting Centre, Meteorological Institute, Norway
Dr. August H. Auer, past professor of atmospheric science, University of Wyoming; previously chief meteorologist, Meteorological Service (MetService) of New Zealand
Dr. Vincent Gray, expert reviewer for the IPCC and author of The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of ‘Climate Change 2001,’ Wellington, N.Z.
Dr. Howard Hayden, emeritus professor of physics, University of Connecticut
Dr Benny Peiser, professor of social anthropology, Faculty of Science, Liverpool John Moores University, U.K.
Dr. Jack Barrett, chemist and spectroscopist, formerly with Imperial College London, U.K.
Dr. William J.R. Alexander, professor emeritus, Dept. of Civil and Biosystems Engineering, University of Pretoria, South Africa. Member, United Nations Scientific and Technical Committee on Natural Disasters, 1994-2000
Dr. S. Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences, University of Virginia; former director, U.S. Weather Satellite Service
Dr. Harry N.A. Priem, emeritus professor of planetary geology and isotope geophysics, Utrecht University; former director of the Netherlands Institute for Isotope Geosciences; past president of the Royal Netherlands Geological & Mining Society
Dr. Robert H. Essenhigh, E.G. Bailey professor of energy conversion, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, The Ohio State University
Dr. Sallie Baliunas, astrophysicist and climate researcher, Boston, Mass.
Douglas Hoyt, senior scientist at Raytheon (retired) and co-author of the book The Role of the Sun in Climate Change; previously with NCAR, NOAA, and the World Radiation Center, Davos, Switzerland
Dipl.-Ing. Peter Dietze, independent energy advisor and scientific climate and carbon modeller, official IPCC reviewer, Bavaria, Germany
Dr. Boris Winterhalter, senior marine researcher (retired), Geological Survey of Finland, former professor in marine geology, University of Helsinki, Finland
Dr. Wibjorn Karlen, emeritus professor, Dept. of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden
Dr. Hugh W. Ellsaesser, physicist/meteorologist, previously with the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Calif.; atmospheric consultant.
Dr. Art Robinson, founder, Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, Cave Junction, Ore.
Dr. Arthur Rorsch, emeritus professor of molecular genetics, Leiden University, The Netherlands; past board member, Netherlands organization for applied research (TNO) in environmental, food and public health
Dr. Alister McFarquhar, Downing College, Cambridge, U.K.; international economist
Dr. Richard S. Courtney, climate and atmospheric science consultant, IPCC expert reviewer, U.K.
Severian, you had to expect this. The following is the list of contributors to the IPCC 2001 report (apologies to Sister Toldjah for wasting her bandwidth. Sister he made me do it, I swear!). Severian, we’ve beaten on each other long enough and it’s reaching an absurd degree. Howzabout we call a truce and consider this topic beaten like a dead horse? It’s been fun — really. I’ll give you the last word to insult me some more. Best Regards . . .
–Bob
Annex A. Authors and Expert Reviewers
Argentina
Daniel Bouille Fundecion Bariloche
Marcelo Cabido IMBIV, University of Cordoba
Osvaldo F. Canziani Co-Chair, WGII
Rodolfo Carcavallo Department of Entomology
Jorge O. Codignotto Laboratorio Geologia y Dinamica Costera
Martin de Zuviria Aeroterra S.A.
Sandra Myrna Diaz Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biologia Vegetal
Jorge Frangi Universidad Nacional de la Plata
Hector Ginzo Instituto de Neurobiologia
Osvaldo Girardin Fundacion Bariloche
Carlos Labraga Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Tecnicas, Centro Nactional Patagonico
Gabriel Soler Fundacion Instituto Latinoamericano de Politicas Sociales (ILAPS)
Walter Vargas University of Buenos Aires – IEIMA
Ernesto F. Viglizzo PROCISUR/INTO/CONICET
Australia
Susan Barrell Bureau of Meteorology
Bryson Bates CSIRO
Ian Carruthers Australian Greenhouse Office
Habiba Gitay Australian National University
John A. Church CSIRO Division of Oceanography
Ove Hoegh-Guldberg The University of Queensland
Roger Jones CSIRO Atmospheric Research
Bryant McAvaney Bureau of Meteorology Research Centre
Chris Mitchell CSIRO Atmosphere Research
Ian Noble Australian National University
Barrie Pittock CSIRO (Climate Impact Group)
Andy Reisinger Ministry for the Environment
B. Soderbaum Greenhouse Policy Office, Australian Greenhouse Office
Greg Terrill Australian Greenhouse Office
Kevin Walsh Principal Research Scientist CSIRO Atmospheric Research
John Zillman Vice-Chair, WGI
Austria
Renate Christ IPCC Secretariat
Helmut Hojesky Federal Ministry for Environment
K. Radunsky Federal Environment Agency
Bangladesh
Q.K. Ahmad Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad
Barbados
Leonard Nurse Coastal Zone Management Unit
Belgium
Philippe Huybrechts Vrije Universiteit Brussel
C. Vinckier Department of Chemistry, KULeuven
R. Zander University of Liege
Benin
Epiphane Dotou Ahlonsou Service Météorologique National
Michel Boko Universite de Bourgogne
Annex A Authors and Expert Reviewers
Bosnia
Permanent Mission of Bosnia & Herzegovina
Botswana
Pauline O. Dube University of Botswana
Brazil
Gylvan Meira Filho Vice-Chair, IPCC
Jose Roberto Moreira Biomass User Network (BUN )
Canada
Brad Bass Environment Canada
James P. Bruce Canadian Climate Program Board
Margo Burgess Natural Resources Canada
Wenjun Chen Natural Resources Canada
Jing Chen University of Toronto
Stewart J. Cohen Environment Canada
Patti Edwards Environment Canada
David Etkin Environment Canada
Darren Goetze Environment Canada
J. Peter Hall Canadian Forest Service
H. Hengeveld Environment Canada
Pamela Kertland Natural Resources Canada
Abdel Maaroud Environment Canada
Joan Masterton Environment Canada
Chris McDermott Environment Canada
Brian Mills Environment Canada
Linda Mortsch Environment Canada
Tad Murty Baird and Associates Coastal Engineers
Paul Parker University of Waterloo
John Robinson University of British Columbia
Hans-Holger Rogner University of Victoria
Daniel Scott Environment Canada
Sharon Smith Natural Resources Canada
Barry Smit University of Guelph
John Stone Vice-Chair, WGI
Tana Lowen Stratton Dept. Foreign Affairs and International Trade
Roger Street Environment Canada
Eric Taylor Natural Resources Canada
G. Daniel Williams Environment Canada (retired)
Chile
E. Basso Independent Consultant
China
Du Bilan China Institute for Marine Development Strategy
Z. Chen China Meteorological Administration
Liu Chunzhen Hydrological Forecasting & Water Control Center
Zhou Dadi Energy Research Institute
Qin Dahe China Meteorological Administration
Xiaosu Dai IPCC WGI TSU
Lin Erda Chinese Academy of Agricultural Science
Mingshan Su Tsinghua University
Yihui Ding Co-Chair, WGI
Guangsheng Zhou Chinese Academy of Sciences
Z.C. Zhao National Climate Center
Cuba
Ramon Pichs-Madruga Vice-Chair, WGIII
A.G. Suarez Cuban Environmental Agency
Czech Republic
Jan Pretel Vice-Chair, WGII
Denmark
Jesper Gundermann Danish Energy Agency
Kirsten Halsnaes Riso International Laboratory
Erik Rasmussen Danish Energy Agency
Martin Stendel Danish Meteorological Institute
Finland
Timothy Carter Finnish Environment Institute
P. Heikinheimo Ministry of Environment
Raino Heino Finnish Meteorological Institute
Pekka E. Kauppi University of Helsinki
R. Korhonen VTT Energy
A. Lampinen University of Jyväskyla
I. Savolainen VTT Energy
France
Olivier Boucher Universite de Lille I
Marc Darras Gaz de France
Jane Ellis OECD
Jean-Charles Hourcade CIRED/CNRS
J.C. Morlot Environment Department
M. Petit Ecole Polytechnique
Gambia
B.E. Gomez Department of Water Resources
M. Njie Department of Water Resources
Germany
Heinz-Jurgen Ahlgrimm Institute for Technology & Biosystems
Rosemarie Benndorf Umweltbundesamt
Peter Burschel Technische Universitat Munchen
Ulrich Cubasch Max Planck Institut für Meteorologie
U. Fuentes German Advisory Council on Global Change
Joanna HouseMax Planck Inst. Biogeochemie
Jucundus Jacobeit Universitaet Wuerzburg
Eberhard Jochem Vice-Chair, WGIII
Harald Kohl Federal Ministry of the Environment
Petra Mahrenholz Federal Environmental Agency of Germany
I. Colin Prentice Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry
C. le Quéré Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry
Sarah Raper University of East Anglia
Ferenc Toth Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research
Manfred Treber Germanwatch
R. Sartorius Umweltbundesamt
Michael Weber Ludwig-Maximilians Universität München
Gerd-Rainer Weber Gesamtverband des Deutschen Steinkohlenberghaus
Hungary
G. Koppany University of Szeged
Halldor Thorgeirsson Ministry for the Environment
India
Murari Lal Indian Institute of Technology
Rajendra K. Pachauri Tata Energy Research Institute
N.H. Ravindranath Indian Institute of Sciences
Priyadarshi Shukla Indian Institute of Management
Leena Srivastava Tata Energy Research Institute
Indonesia
R.T.M. Sutamihardja Vice-Chair, WGIII
Israel
Simon Krichak Tel Aviv University
Italy
Filippo Giorgi Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics (ICTP)
Annarita Mariotti ENEA Climate Section
Japan
Kazuo Asakura Central Research Institute (CRIEPI)
Noriyuki Goto University of Tokyo, Komaba
Mariko Handa Organization for Landscape and Urban Greenery Technology Development
Hideo Harasawa Social and Environmental Systems Division
Yasuo Hosoya Tokyo Electric Power Company
Y. Igarashi Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Takeshi Imai The Kansai Electric Power Co., Inc.
M. Inoue Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry
Hisashi Kato Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry
Naoki Matsuo Global Industrial and Social Progress Research Institute (GISPRI)
Hisayoshi Morisugi Tohoku University
Tsuneyuki Morita National Institute for Environmental Studies
Shinichi Nagata Environment Agency
S. Nakagawa Japan Meteorological Agency
Yoshiaki Nishimura Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry
Ichiro Sadamori Global Industrial and Social Progress Research Institute (GISPRI)
Akihiko Sasaki National Institute of Public Health
Shojiro Sato Chuba Electric Power Co.
A. Takeuchi Japan Meteorological Agency
Kanako Tanaka Global Industrial and Social Progress
Tomihiro Taniguchi Vice-Chair, IPCC
Kenya
Richard S. Odingo Vice-Chair, WGIII
Kingiri Senelwa Moi University
Malawi
Paul Desanker University of Virginia
Mexico
Gustavo Albin Permanent Representative Mission of Mexico
Morocco
Abdelkader Allali Ministry of Agriculture, Rural Development and Fishing
Abdalah Mokssit Centre National du Climat et de Recherchco Meteorologiques
Netherlands
Alphonsus P.M. Baede Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute (KNMI)
T.A. Buishand Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute
W.L. Hare Greenpeace International
Catrinus J. Jepma University of Groningen
E. Koekkoek Ministry of Housing, Spacial Planning and the Environment
Rik Leemans National Institute of Public Health and Environmental Protection
K. McKullen Greenpeace International
Bert Metz Co-Chair, WGIII
Leo Meyer Ministry of the Environment
Maresa Oosterman Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken
M.B.A.M. Scheffers National Institute for Coastal and Marine Management
Rob Swart Head, WGIII TSU
H.M. ten Brink ECN
Aad P. van Ulden Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute
J. Verbeek Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management
New Zealand
Jon Barnett Macmillan Brown Centre for Pacific Studies, University of Canterbury
Vincent Gray Climate Consultant
Wayne Hennessy Coal Research Association of New Zealand, Inc.
Piers Maclaren NZ Forest Research Institute
Martin Manning Vice-Chair, WGII
Helen Plume Ministry for the Environment
A. Reisinger Ministry for the Environment
J. Salinger National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd (NIWA)
Ralph Sims Massey University
Niger
Garba Goudou Dieudonne Office of the Prime Minister
Nigeria
Sani Sambo Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University
Norway
Torgrim Aspjell The Norwegian Pollution Control Authorities
Oyvind Christophersen Ministry of Environment
Eirik J. Forland Norwegian Meteorological Institute
S. Gornas University of Bergen
Jarle Inge Holten Terrestrial Ecology Research
Snorre Kverndokk Frischsenteret/Frisch Centre
A. Moene The Norwegian Meteorological Institute
Audun Rossland The Norwegian Pollution Control Authorities
Nils R. Saelthun Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Administration
Tom Segalstad University of Oslom Norway
S. Sundby Institute of Marine Research
Kristian Tangen The Fridtjof Nansen Institute
Oman
Mohammed bin Ali Al-Hakmani Ministry of Regional Municipalities, Environment & Water Resources
Pakistan
Tariq Banuri Sustainable Development Policy Institute
Peru
Eduardo Calvo Vice-Chair, WGIII
Nadia Gamboa Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Peru
Phillipines
Lewis H. Ziska International Rice Research Institute
Poland
Jan Dobrowolski Goetel’s School of Environmental Protection & Engineering
Zbyszek Kundzewicz Polish Academy of Sciences
Miroslaw Mietus Institute of Meteorology & Water Management
A. Olecka National Fund for Environmental Protection and Water Management
M. Sadowski National Fund for Environmental Protection and Water Management
Wojciech Suchorzewski Warsaw University of Technology
Romania
Vasile Cuculeanu National Institute of Meteorology and Hydrology
Adriana Marica National Institute of Meteorology and Hydrology
Russia
Yurij Anokhin Institute of Global Climate & Ecology
Oleg Anisimov State Hydrological Institute
Igor Bashmakov Centre for Energy Efficiency (CENEF)
Igor Karol Main Geophysical Observatory
Alla Tsyban Institute of Global Climate and Ecology
Yuri Izrael Vice-Chair, IPCC
Senegal
Alioune Ndiaye Vice-Chair, WGII
Sierra Leone
Ogunlade R. Davidson Co-chair, WGIII
Slovak Republic
Milan Lapin Comenius University
South Africa
Gerrie Coetzee Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism
Bruce Hewitson University of Capetown
Steve Lennon Eskom
Robert J. Scholes CSIR
Spain
Sergio Alonso University of the Balearic Islands
Francisco Ayala-Carcedo Geomining Technological Institute of Spain
Luis Balairon National Meteorological Institute
Felix Hernandez CSIC
Don Antonio Labajo Salazar Government of Spain
Maria-Carmen Llasat Botija University of Barcelona
Josep Penuelas Center for Ecological Research & Forestry Applications
Ana Yaber University, Complutense of Madrid
Sri Lanka
Mohan Munasinghe Vice-Chair, WGIII
B. Punyawardena Department of Agriculture
Sudan
Nagmeldin Elhassan Higher Coucil for Environment & Natural Resources
Sweden
Marianne Lillieskold Swedish Environmental Protection Agency
Ulf Molau University of Gothenburg
Nils-Axel Morner Paleogeophysics & Geodynamics Stockholm University
Markku Rummukainen Swedish Meterorological and Hydrological Institute
Switzerland
Christof Appenzeller Federal Office of Meteorology and Climatology (MetroSwiss)
Fortunat Joos Vice-Chair, WGI
Herbert Lang Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich (ETH)
José Romero Office Federal de l’Environnement, des Forets et du Paysage
T. Stocker University of Bern
Tanzania
M.J. Mwandosya Centre for Energy, Environment, Science, and Technology
Buruhani S. Nyenzi Vice-Chair, WGI
United Kingdom
Nigel Arnell University of Southampton
C. Baker Natural Environment Research Council
Terry Barker University of Cambridge
K. G. Begg University of Surrey
S.A. Boehmer-Christiansen University of Hull
Richard Courtney The Libert
K. Deyes Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Thomas E. Downing Environmental Change Institute
University of Oxford
Caroline Fish Global Atmosphere Division
Chris Folland Met Office, Hadley Centre
Jonathan Gregory Hadley Climate Research Centre
Steve Gregory Forestry Commission
David Griggs Head, WG-I TSU
Joanna Haigh Imperial College
M. Harley English Nature
Susan Haseldine Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA)
John Houghton Co-Chair, WG-I
Mike Hulme University of East Anglia
Michael Jefferson World Energy Council
Cathy Johnson IPCC, Working Group I
Sari Kovats London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
David Mansell-Moullin International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA)
Anil Markandya University of Bath
A. McCulloch ICI Chemicals & Polymers Limited
Gordon McFadyen Global Atmospheric Division Deparment of the Environment, Transport and the Regions
A.J. McMichael London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
Aubrey Meyer Global Commons Institute
John Mitchell Hadley Center
Martin Parry Jackson Environment Institute
J.M. Penman Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions
S. Raper University of East Anglia
Keith Shine Department of Meteorology, University of Reading
P. Singleton Scottish Environment Protection Agency
Peter Smith IACR-Rothamsted
P. Smithson University of Sheffield
Peter Thorne School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia
P. van der Linden Met Office Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research
David Warrilow Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Philip L. Woodworth Bidston Observatory
United States
Dilip Ahuja National Institute of Advanced Studies
Dan Albritton NOAA Aeronomy Laboratory
Jeffrey S. Amthor Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Peter Backlund Office of Science and Technology Policy/Environment Division
Lee Beck U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Leonard Bernstein IPIECA
Daniel Bodansky U.S. Department of State
Rick Bradley US Department of Energy
James L. Buizer National Oceanic & Amtospheric Administration
John Christy University of Alabama
Susan Conard Office of Science and Technology Policy/Environment Division
Curt Covey Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Benjamin DeAngelo U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Robert Dickinson University of Arizona
David Dokken University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
Rayola Dougher American Petroleum Institute
William Easterling Pennsylvania State University
Jerry Elwood Department of Enegry
Paul R. Epstein Harvard Medical School
Paul D. Farrar Naval Oceanographic Office
Howard Feldman American Petroleum Institute
Josh Foster NOAA Office of Global Programs
Laurie Geller National Research Council
Michael Ghil University of California, Los Angeles
Vivien Gornitz Columbia University
Kenneth Green Reason Public Policy Institute
David Harrison National Economic Research Associates
David D. Houghton University of Wisconsin-Madison
Malcolm Hughes University of Arizona
Stanley Jacobs Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University
Henry D. Jacoby Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Judson Jaffe Council of Economic Advisers
Steven M. Japar Ford Motor Company
Russell O. Jones American Petroleum Institute
Sally Kane NOAA
T. Karl NOAA National Climatic Data Center
Charles Keller IGPP.SIO.UCSD
Haroon Kheshgi Exxon Research & Engineering Company
Ann Kinzig Arizona State University
Maureen T. Koetz Nuclear Energy Institute
Rattan Lal Ohio State Universtiy
Chris Landsea NOAA AOML/Hurricane Research Division
Neil Leary Head, WGII TSU
Sven B. Lundstedt The Ohio State University
Anthony Lupo University of Missouri – Columbia
Michael C. MacCracken U.S. Global Change Research Program
James J. McCarthy Co-Chair, WGII
Gerald Meehl NCAR
Robert Mendelsohn Yale University
Patrick Michaels University of Virginia
Evan Mills Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
William Moomaw The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University
Berrien Moore University of New Hampshire
James Morison University of Washington
Jennifer Orme-Zavaleta USEP/NHEERL/WED
Camille Parmesan University of Texas
J.A. Patz Johns Hopkins University
Joyce Penner University of Michigan
Roger A. Pielke Colorado State University
Michael Prather University of California Irvine
Lynn K. Price Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
V. Ramaswamy NOAA
Robert L. Randall The RainForest ReGeneration Institute
Richard Richels Electric Power Research Institute
David Rind National Aeronautics and Space Agency
Catriona Rogers U.S. Global Change Research Program
Matthias Ruth University of Maryland
Jayant Sathaye Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Michael Schlesinger University of Illinois-Urbana-Champaign
Stephen Schneider Stanford University
Michael J. Scott Battelle Pacific Northwest Nat’l Laboratory
Roger Sedjo Resources for the Future
Walter Short National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Joel B. Smith Stratus Consulting Inc.
Robert N. Stavins John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University
Ron Stouffer US Dept of Commerce/NOAA
T. Talley Office of Global Change, U.S. Department of State
Kevin Trenberth NCAR
Edward Vine Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Henry Walker U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Robert Watson Chair, IPCC
Howard Wesoky Federal Aviation Administration
John P. Weyant Energy Modeling Forum, Stanford University
Tom Wilbanks Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Venezuela
Armando Ramirez Rojas Vice-Chair, WGI
Zimbabwe
Chris Magadza University of Zimbabwe
M.C. Zinyowera MSU Zimbabwe Gvt
Bob, I think you put too much stock in the IPCC, which has proved itself to be untrustworthy and duplicitous (emphasis added):
That was from the mid-90s. How can we trust that the same tactics haven’t been used again today? Furthermore, why would the IPCC feel the need to do such a thing in the first place?
It gets even worse ST:
Update (p.m.): If you’re wondering about this procedure which, to my knowledge, is unprecedented in public commission reporting, here’s what IPCC procedures (section 4) say about Technical Report acceptance:
Changes (other than grammatical or minor editorial changes) made after acceptance by the Working Group or the Panel shall be those necessary to ensure consistency with the Summary for Policymakers or the Overview Chapter.
So the purpose of the three-month delay between the publication of the Summary for Policy-Makers and the release of the actual WG1 is to enable them to make any “necessary” adjustments to the technical report to match the policy summary. Unbelievable. Can you imagine what securities commissions would say if business promoters issued a big promotion and then the promoters made the “necessary” adjustments to the qualifying reports and financial statements so that they matched the promotion. Words fail me.
IPCC insiders should not be allowed to change a comma of the WG1 Report after Feb 2, 2007 to “ensure consistency” with the Summary. If the two are inconsistent, let the chips fall where they may.
Link
So, they are up to their old tricks again. Also, they closed off acceptance of papers before the recent ones published showing that the oceans have been cooling for the past 2-3 years, and deliberately did not go back and incorporate that data as it completely destroys their model based ramblings.
But talking to people like Bob is a waste of time, he is a fundamentalist on this issue, with a completely closed mind, as sadly so many others are. Unlike most of us, these people actually seem to enjoy it when people pee on their heads and tell them it’s raining. Hopefully, though, the links and information in this thread will prove enlightening to more open minded and rational people, which is the entire reason I kept posting. It was obvious from the start that Bob would never actually read or think about this for himself, you can only hope that the thread will prove enlightening to others.
Having sat on peer review panels, and panels choosing which articles are to be accepted for publication, I am fully aware of how political and pet theory biases can impact what gets published. I have over 20 published scientific and technical papers and have co-authored two books, so I don’t need others to “explain” the system to me, especially people who have absolutely no experience with this.
This article is an excellent look at the kind of mindset that the environmental extremists have and which leads to the kind of inane overreaction we see on a daily basis out of them.