Reader “ural” picked up on something in the comments;
“I just stuck the list [of contributors to the IPCC WGI Third Assessment Report] into a spreadsheet to see who the 2500+ consensus scientists were … See what happens when I sort the names… We’re down to 605 consensus scientists”
Indeed. It’s an exaggeration that’s been previous noted. Roger Pielke Sr.;
The media is in error when it states that, “The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change –made up of thousands of scientists from around the world — reported earlier this month they are more certain than ever that humans are heating earth’s atmosphere through the burning of fossil fuels….” (see)
Are there really “thousands of scientists” who wrote this report? Hardly. The IPCC is actually led and written by just a few dozen scientists.
[…]
This candid report confirms that the Statement For Policymakers was actually written with a small number of climate scientists. That such a small number of scientists are actually involved in the writing may make sense from the perspective of efficiency, but it also is guaranteed to result in a report that emphasizes the particular perspectives of the small group of scientists who wrote it. The biases that result would have been balanced if other climate scientists were able to write alternative perspectives, but this was not done. A “unanimous consensus” is hardly how science should be presented by a subset of the climate science community.
The use of the term “lead authors” is also misleading as most are co-authors with one lead author per chapter. The contributing authors provide material and comment, but, based on my experience in the 1995 IPCC report process, do not function as true co-authors. Thus the actually number of true lead authors actually corresponds to just the first author on each chapter.
The list still includes the name of leading hurricane expert, Chris Landsea, who publicly withdrew in 2005, citing IPPC misrepresentation of the research ;
It is beyond me why my colleagues would utilize the media to push an unsupported agenda that recent hurricane activity has been due to global warming. Given Dr. Trenberth’s role as the IPCC’s Lead Author responsible for preparing the text on hurricanes, his public statements so far outside of current scientific understanding led me to concern that it would be very difficult for the IPCC process to proceed objectively with regards to the assessment on hurricane activity.
So, ural, that should be 604.
And how many more of the remaining 604 are there without their consent? One French malaria expert had to threaten legal action to get his name removed.
I sincerely regret being a source of confusion.
This was the third IPCC report(2001). The fourth report is coming out this May–we have thus far only had digests. We’ll be able then to see how many scientists were actually involved.
Here is the proper link:
http://www.ipcc.ch/
How are we ordinary rubes going to process all this global warming poop from “THOUSANDS” of “EXPERT SCIENTISTS” spreading gloom and doom?
How long will it take to get to the truth?
Last year was a very quiet year on the hurricane front. This year they predict a very stormy year.
Of course, they know it all, and we are all to blame. Mother Nature is going to punish us real good this year according to those “experts”.
BATTEN DOWN THE HATCHES and bake some crow to stuff down their throats if it doesn’t happen.
So this year is going to be ANOTHER bad Hurricane year…..hmmmmmm – just like 2006?????
I guess if you keep telling everyone it is going to happen – eventually it does?
As we sit out here in Alberta in the snow with temperatures in the -teens on April 4, having had the first snowfall in October – believe me – a little Global Warming would be welcome.
H.S. Kheshgi Exxon Mobil Research and Engineering Company, USA
and
H. Khesghi Exxon Mobil Research & Engineering Company, USA
are also on the list.. let me guess.. they’re twins.
Thanks Dawg, but it hardly negates the point being made. Most of those names are no more involved in the process than you or I are.
“This was the third IPCC report(2001). The fourth report is coming out this May”
Even though the above post clearly says the third assessment report, you make an important point because the fact that the report isn’t even released yet hasn’t stopped people like David Suzuki, Al Gore and Media from saying 2500+ scientists agree.
How can they say that when the report isn’t out yet? And keep in mind, a person’s name on the report doesn’t mean they agree with it.
Those scientists that are involved with the process and don’t agree with the findings are still put on the list of contributors…Their research just isn’t included.
“fossil fuels”
ok, i’m switching to non-fossil, like WOOD!
yippee, i’m green
Those scientists that are involved with the process and don’t agree with the findings are still put on the list of contributors…Their research just isn’t included.
How can you say that when the report isn’t even out yet?
But in any case, I disagree that “most of those names are no more involved in the process than [Kate] or I are.” They provide, after all, the research findings that go into the mix.
the report according to the Herald this morning is saying up to 30% of all life on earth will be killed by global warming.
maybe “consensus scientists” are the bellweather species and are dropping off faster.
one can only hope.
ps. Dr. Bono Fruitfly Suzuki has been strangely quiet for a month or so.
The scientists who are participating were selected by their governments. They are not there because they are necessarily the tops in their fields. They definitely do not reflect a wide cross section of scientific opinion. Saying there is a scientific consensus based on these scientists is like saying that a consensus of politicians at the Republican National Conventions has proven that conservatism provides a better quality of life for all than does liberalism.
Perhaps Dr Suzuki is in for a refit and engine overhaul.
He’s just laying low; hoping to not draw any attention to it.
John Denver was another envirobat and don’t misunderstand me,I’m all for leaving a lighter footprint where possible.Anyway on with my John Denver story…
In the mid-seventies,during the first oil crunch when it looked as if fuel was going to be in short supply,a friend of mine living in Colorado told of seeing a large billboard posted in downtown Denver with John Denver’s smiling face on it.
In large letters beneath was printed ‘ BE LIKE JOHN DENVER: HOARD IT ‘
Apparently Mr Denver had had a large fuel tank installed underground on his property and was keeping it hushed.
This report reminds me of a full page ad that appeared in the local paper, paid for by the non smoking groups. It listed several organizations and groups against smoking. I took the time to phone every org listed, and asked the following questions of their executive or spokesperson.
1. When did your group pass a motion or resolution to support a non smoking campaign.
2. When positions are taken, how is that done.
3. Can any member of your org make a stmt that supposedly speaks for the whole membership.
4. Did your org help pay for this ad.
5. What, you mean you have no idea what I am talking about, you did not give permission for your name or org to be used.
After much research I discovered that someone from the nsg had asked for a list of registered org in Souther AB, from consumer and corporate affairs, and just published the names. They did not get official permission from any group.
I spent a lot of time during that period in the hospital with a very ill family member. The smoking room was filled with nurses and doctors on their breaks. I asked the nurses why their Union had backed the ad, and were they not breaking union policy. Of course, they knew nothing about it.
Huge phone bill, but worth it. I give the same credulence to any report supported by 1000s.
Too bad SDA wasn’t around back then.
Another example was a full page ad supporting Anne McClellan last election. Said, paid for by supporters of Anne. I belonged to an org that had been contacted for support. We were told if we paid x amt for the ad, and allowed our name, we would be given a donation from the liberal party in excess of what the ad cost. I, as treasurer, vetoed the idea. The ad did appear, but I have always wondered how many supported her. Not many, she lost.
I just heard Dennis Miller’s stand up routine on GW/Kyoto last night…funny!
“There’s a lot of differing data about global warming but as far as I can gather, over the last hundred years the temperature on this planet has gone up 1.8 degrees. Am I the only one who finds that amazingly stable? I could go back to my hotel room tonight and fXXk with the thermostat for three to four hours to dial in that rise…. I could not detect that difference…..and waddaya think the pioneers on the prairies thought in the dust bowl of the 30s…did they go snakeshit over global warming after 4 years of NO RAIN…nawww they just looked around and said…got awful dry all of a sudden, maybe we should call that irrigation fella to see what he suggests”
Thankyou goodnight you’ve been a great audience
Scientist Chris Landsea – “It is beyond me why my colleagues would utilize the media to push an unsupported agenda that recent hurricane activity has been due to global warming.”
MSM are being used simply because they are part and parcel of disinformation.
They have been at the forefront of the global warming tale from the get-go.
“Global warming” has basically been driven by MSM,useful idiots, ‘groupthink’ information dissemination for Canadians.
Maurice Strong is smiling in China as the Canadian Kyoto bangers attempt to force-flow Canadian dollars to China, and damn the results to our own economy.
Joe: Don’t forget that Moe runs one of the first and most lucerative carbon credit exchange banks in Chicago with a branch in Beijing…Moe’s flock of useful idiots on this side of the drink are shaking the Kyoto tree down for big loot…and Moe is smiling all the way to the first national bank of China.
How many ipcc withdrawals have there been? Here are some
Chris Landsea
Paul Reiter
Vincent Gray
Peter Dietze
Richard S. Courtney
John Christy
http://www.digg.com/environment/Global_Warming_for_the_Skeptical_Or_the_Merely_Inquisitve
John M Reynolds
Dawg – I’m a co-author on a peer-reviewed published scientific paper on canine retinal dysplasia. While my contribution was substantial (I gathered background data, conducted test breeding trials and created the genetic pedigrees), but my lack of formal qualifications disqualify me from speaking to any of the portions relating to clinical findings.
Yet, under the rules of the IPPC, I would be included as lending my name to the conclusions reached by a third party, appointed by a government agency, who reviewed it after the fact.
What a bunch of scumbags at the UN.
What a bunch of idiots who idolized people like Suzu and the Goracle and get the maaa-asses to sing from the same hymnbook.
“Most observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations.” IPCC report 2007.
This scientist takes issue with the word “most” in the IPCC statement.
http://www.iarc.uaf.edu/highlights/2007/akasofu_3_07/
I really have nothing better to do, so I ran the list of 605 folks (not even sure if they are all scientists) through a pivot table in Excel. Cleaned it up a bit (i.e., an ampersand and the word “and” mean the same thing, right?), and got the idea that this is really an Anglo-Saxon, not a UN document.
Almost 62% of the scientists are from the so-called “Anglosphere”: Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK and the US. Heck, lets add the Saxons (Germany) and you get over 72%. China and India, with a population of 2.3 Billion (and of course, not under any obligation under Kyoto), have 18 scientists total. Norway itself has 14.
But I am glad that Benin got in there.
It really is political, like an All Star game, where every country has to have a rep.
James: I could imagine the scepticism in these here parts if the scientists had all come from, say, Africa or India.
Kate: Was your research an integral part of the resulting paper, or was it not? Were your findings misinterpreted? Were they fudged by others? Were they selectively used?
” .. The media is in error when it states that, “The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change –made up of thousands of scientists from around the world ”
THE MEDIA IS IN ERROR.
That sums it up. Actually,the media is in error on a lot of issues. Could they not be held liable ?? It is illegal and criminal to yell FIRE in a movie theatre.
“How many Scientists does it take …”
Perfect !! How do ya think of all these headers, Kate ?? So topical. So revealing. Leaves the Kooks with no comeback.
It always puzzles me how the wako-basket-weaver types are able to be;
so relentless,
so untiring,
so dedicated to their cause,
so unavailable for a debate (Suzuki, Gore),
so durable when confronted with a put down,
so loyal to the “cult”,
so media savy,
so politically connected,
so lifetime dedicated,
so well funded,
so tenacious,
so immune to being embarrassed.
In a way they must be quite talented !!
Talented, in the same way a con-artist is. Or a snake-oil salesperson.
But I think there is a more serious underLYING cause for their tenacity.
They have no choice !! If(when) all this latest scam/hoax falls apart there will be a lot of weavers looking for “work”. And they will be desparate, as they will want to continue on their ‘$high-on-the-hog$’ ways. They have become used to the ‘good-life.’
But can you imagine the look on the Human Resources Manager’s face when he reads a Kyoto Type’s resume !!?? Ahh, like, ya know, in this company/utility/organization we strive to produce a product/service that others want and desire. Something tangable. No gimics.
Don’t call us. We’ll call you. 🙂
How many ipcc withdrawals have there been? Here are some
Chris Landsea
Paul Reiter
Vincent Gray
Peter Dietze
Richard S. Courtney
John Christy
Well, let’s see here:
John Christy doesn’t disagree with androgenic global warming, but doesn’t like catastrophic predictions. “It is scientifically inconceivable,” he says, “that after changing forests into cities, turning millions of acres into irrigated farmland, putting massive quantities of soot and dust into the air, and putting extra greenhouse gases into the air, that the natural course of climate has not changed in some way.”
Richard S. Courtney is a fossil-fuel shill who may not even have a university degree, much less be a specialist in climatology. His claim to be an IPCC revierwer does not appear to be substantiated.
Peter Dietze is an electrical engineer, not a climatologist.
Paul Reiter: “I am not a climatologist, nor an expert on sea level or polar ice. But I do know from talking to many scientists in many disciplines that this consensus is a mirage.” Imgine being on the operating table, and the surgeon comes in–he tells you that he has no real expertise in surgery, but he’s talked to enough folks that he can take out your appendix, no problem.
Chris Landsea appears to be the most credible one in the bunch. His concern was about IPCC claims re hurricane activity–his own area of expertise. Still, he maintains: “I am concerned about the trend in global warming. It is a problem.”
Vincent Gray has no peer-reviewed work on climate change.
Meanwhile, from here http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p357.htm:
“During the past several years, more than 17,100 basic and applied American scientists, two-thirds with advanced degrees, have signed the Global Warming Petition.
Signers of this petition so far include 2,660 physicists, geophysicists, climatologists, meteorologists, oceanographers, and environmental scientists (select this link for a listing of these individuals) who are especially well qualified to evaluate the effects of carbon dioxide on the Earth’s atmosphere and climate.
Signers of this petition also include 5,017 scientists whose fields of specialization in chemistry, biochemistry, biology, and other life sciences (select this link for a listing of these individuals) make them especially well qualified to evaluate the effects of carbon dioxide upon the Earth’s plant and animal life.
Nearly all of the initial 17,100 scientist signers have technical training suitable for the evaluation of the relevant research data, and many are trained in related fields. In addition to these 17,100, approximately 2,400 individuals have signed the petition who are trained in fields other than science or whose field of specialization was not specified on their returned petition.
Of the 19,700 signatures that the project has received in total so far, 17,800 have been independently verified and the other 1,900 have not yet been independently verified. Of those signers holding the degree of PhD, 95% have now been independently verified. One name that was sent in by enviro pranksters, Geri Halliwell, PhD, has been eliminated. Several names, such as Perry Mason and Robert Byrd are still on the list even though enviro press reports have ridiculed their identity with the names of famous personalities. They are actual signers. Perry Mason, for example, is a PhD Chemist…”
Oops… I thought that consensus = right (nevermind how wrong that is when we talk about science).
More on global warming from an admittedly far-left publication. 🙂
http://www.economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?story_id=8975357&fsrc=RSS
Dr. Dawg: My point was that even other developed nations are not very well represented. In fact, the Met Office in Britain makes up 5% of the entire “broad” consensus.
Forgive me, but I’ve worked in government long enough to know that policy “hot houses” (pardon the pun) are often set up and self-sustained for years, if not decades, due to bureaucratic inertia and political connections. I get the idea that this may be what is going on at “The Met”.
Really, though, it seems that smearing human-caused global warming skeptics seems to follow a dull and predictable pattern:
1) skeptic isn’t qualified
2) if qualified, skeptic is paid to lie
This recent paper reflects what I’ve believed all along:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/03/070315101129.htm
“It is impossible to talk about a single temperature for something as complicated as the climate of Earth”
Add to this the farce that is the “Hockey Stick”, and you get enough doubt in my mind to be a skeptic. And I don’t even own an automobile, let alone an SUV (just stopping THAT bit there…)
I wonder, how many of these so called ‘scientists’ are only nodding there heads so they keep the funding flowing.
Just look at sukooky, he keeps nodding his head and toyota keeps sending him checks.
And the goricle he sets up a shell company so he can make a pile of money of this BS.
as alfred e newman says “nuff said”
Oh yes, Mann’s ‘hockey stick graph’. The Mother-of-all-Frauds.
Programed to take data, any data, yes any numbers at all, and print out a graph of the Earth’s temperature that always looks like a hookey-stick.
Ignores the Medieval Warm Period. Ignors the little Ice Age. But looks like a 1000 years of no change and then, presto !! Temp abruptly goes up.
Absolute rubbish, and the world knows it. The United Nations knew it also when they used it in their IPCC report for policy makers.(Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change) Maurice Strong knew it too.
However, they kept the fraud alive until it was a hopeless case. Time and time again ‘Zee Graph’ was discredited.
The Media, the UN, Maurice Strong, Al Gore, David Suzuki may well some day be defendants in the ‘Mother Of All Lawsuits’. IMO.
Climate Doom Fear Mongering Suit. All it would take is for the CBC to find the right person to interview. You know, they are quite good at that.
“Tell me, how do ya feel ??” “Well, for years now I have been stressed. Cannot sleep at night. Had to quit work. Financial stress. Dream the oceans are boiling. Sent all my money to the Suzuki foundation. Sent Al Gore extra insulation for his “cottage”. The enviro-fanatics ruined my life. They quoted the graph. It was a fraud and now I am suing.”
27 A. Ramirez Universidad Central Venezuela, Venezuela
28 A. Ramirez Rojas Universidad Central Venezuela, Venezuela
Same person?
” ..Meanwhile, the IPCC mobilized a large number of climatologists and meteorologists and published several impressive, voluminous publications, one after the other. In one of them, “Climate Change 2001,” for example, a figure that became known as “the hockey stick,” was used prominently in the “Summary for Policy Makers,” in which the temperature shows a dramatic increase during the most recent 100 years, after a slow decrease in temperature over the first 900 years. The nickname “hockey stick” was coined because the temperature-time curve had this sudden, upward kink near the end, like a hockey stick. (Since then, this particular figure has been discredited; the new IPCC Report (2007) does not include the figure.)International Arctic Research Centre, University of Alaska.
//www.iarc.uaf.edu/highlights/2007/akasofu_3_07/
From the Roger Pielke Sr link: “A full report that’s the basis for the summary was drafted by 154 lead authors and more than 450 contributing authors … ”
Kate: “So, ural, that should be 604.”
I just wanted to show the UN that I was willing to play ball … never know when I might need a six figure income for just agreeing to stuff … or a job killing some of 30% of all species when they fail to conform to the computer models.
17;000 scientists signed a paper calling GLOBAL WARMING as a fruad and its become a big fat lie being perpatrated by unscruplous persons and AL GORE is just one of their scoundrels i mean theres plenty of them DAVID SUZUKI,JAMES LOVELOCK,MUARICE STRONG,TED TURNER, and the various eco-freak groups like GREENPEACE,ENVIROMENTAL DEFENSE,SIERRA CLUB,WORLD WILDLIFE FUND ETC its a big time consperacy
I heard this on the radio today. Time mag. has a cover story on Global Warming and a section is on what we can do to help. One such ‘tip’ suggested we quit eating meat because cows are hard on the environment. The quip they use is, A T-Bone is like a Hummer on a plate. And then this. It is suggested we not only recycle our clothes but that we make our own. We should raise our own sheep, feed them organic food of course, and use the COTTON that is sheared from the sheep. Can anyone out there confirm this? Does Time employ people that think cotton comes from sheep? Up untill now, I thought the reporter from CTV saying the tsunami was a result of global warming was the most idiotic comment on the subject. Up until now…
If I may … from the daily whack
I like the idea of a warmer world. Life will flourish in more places like Norther Canada for example. Some areas will suffer more drought, but the chips will fall where they may as they always have.
I doubt that humans play a big roll in what happens to the overall climate of the planet, but we may well enjoy many benefits from much of it.
Another view of life on Earth: There have always been large areas of this planet are uninhabitable, but that was more often because of political despotism. Climate change will displace far fewer human beings than the second world war did.
Climate change will not come close to killing the millions upon millions of people that Stalin or Hitler did.
The bubonic plague still has a pretty big record of devastating humanity. And how about the Spanish influenza taking our about 15 million during the second world war, not to mention the war itself.
All these events occurred in a world that had about two or three billion populaton, so those were pretty big percentages if you average them out.
Climate change will no doubt put a lot of people on the move globally, but we have seen this before. Take solace in the fact that climate change is not malevolent and we are a far more tech savvy world capable to much more adaptation.
If the world’s population shrinks over this century because of climate change, that will be good thing. There is no good reason I can think of to have more than the nearly seven billion of us that are now here sucking up resources by the mega ton. And what are most of doing here anyway but eating, sleeping and shitting.
Finally, I suggest that we are too worried about this problem when you consider the only people who are doing the worrying and the planning and the fear-mongering are white Christian types (or more so the secular progressive members) of European descent. You know the usual suspects, Americans, Canadians, Europeans, Australians.
At the rate, those populations are quickly diminishing themselves demographically with very low birth rates. The problems we are so worried about will be inherited by the growing triumvirate of China, India and Muslim world.
Perhaps that will end up being our last laugh on the two malevolent members of those three who will dominate once we are completely irrelevant.
Bummer about India thought, I kind of like them since they are actually a lot like us only browner.
Boots,
Don’t be so much of an idiot. In 2100 the sheep will come in 3 flavors … wool, cotton and silk … rayon in 2125.
Boot,
That demonstrates how stupid people have become since the Secular Progressive relativists have taken over the educational system.
That is also why the masses believe fools like Gore and Suzuki.
Critical thinking and understanding of basic science and nature are now in the realm of mysticism.
Al Gore was booed at Concordia U while receiving an honorary doctorate…
“His presentation was halted at least twice as opponents to his agenda began to shout out.
They called him a liar and a villain, and screamed, “What about your swimming pools?” in regards to recent allegations that the monthly electricity bill of Gore’s estate rivalled a year’s bill for the average American home.”
http://media.www.brockpress.com/media/storage/paper384/news/2007/04/03/News/Al.Gore.Graduates.From.Concordia-2820594.shtml
Way to go Canada!!!
Fritz,
this sounds like it was zealots further to the left and more green than Gore who were doing to booing.
Don’t get your hopes up at Concordia. They are Columbia University north with regards to the secular progressive world.
Boots TIME magazine is nthing but lies and halftruths its your typcal left-wing lie a week liberal rag
I think this should be in this string
news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html