Recall the mocking tones of the warmists as they claimed again and again that “deniers” had little “peer reviewed” research to back their claims or doubts. You would be excused if you thought that peer review was some kind of gold standard that every single warmist clung to … you’d be forgiven, but still misled:
In the words of those quoted above, the use of grey literature is essential, necessary, and unavoidable in the preparation of IPCC reports. According to these people, the IPCC has relied on grey literature extensively for some time.
So confident of their peerless review are some, that they’ve issued an edict … vote GOP and die.
Donna Laframboise has been ripping them new ones on this topic for awhile.
She’s also been tracking down the pedigree of the infamous “2500 leading Scientists” the IPCC always rants on about.
Guess what . . . another IPCC/UN lie.
Fear not, the UN is about to change the channel on this scam and change the channel to the next great hairy-scary lie/con job . . .
“UN authorizes new body to stem loss of ecosystems vital to life
Ecosystem management key to long-term climate change adaptation and risk reduction
21 December 2010 – A new international body aimed at reversing the unprecedented loss of species and ecosystems vital to life on Earth due to human activity has passed its final hurdle with approval by the United Nations General Assembly.
In a resolution adopted by consensus, the Assembly yesterday called on the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) to take the necessary steps to set up the Intergovernmental Science Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), the final approval needed for the body for which the groundwork had been laid at UNEP-sponsored meetings earlier this year.
“IPBES represents a major breakthrough in terms of organizing a global response to the loss of living organisms and forests, freshwaters, coral reefs and other ecosystems that underpin all life, including economic life, on Earth,” UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner said today.”
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=37130&Cr=biodiversity&Cr1=
My understanding has always been that the IPCC’s founding mandate was to find a connection between CO2 and (supposed) AGW. Ergo, “ignore anything that doesn’t support the theory and use any suitable sources in PR campaigns if necessary”. Am I wrong in my perception?
Hysterical hyperbole is all they have left.
“Arthur M.Schlesinger wrote of Chomsky: “He begins as a preacher to the world and ends as an intellectual crook.”
Hm, just like so many of his fellow “preachers” these days. Does anyone on the Left side of the political spectrum have a passing acquaintance with the Truth?
Or do they all just make it up to prove their point?
Just imagine a straight-faced Peter Mansbridge on a future political panel leading off a segment like this:
“In an interview in January 2011, Noam Chomsky said, ‘A GOP win could kill us all.’ Though some on the far right objected at first, the CBC’s Neil MacDonald did a thorough investigation and found that Chomsky’s statement was peer reviewed by Michael Moore, Bill Maher, Joy Behar, and David Frum. Thus, now that we know what Chomsky said to be a verifiable factual statement, what do you think can be done to bring back America from the brink?”
I’ve posed this in jest, of course, but given the nonsense spewing out of the Corrupt Leftist MSM in the past few years, is it really that far fetched?!
Noam turned out a bubble off because his parents could not spell Norm. Probably got his head flushed a couple times over that.
De-funding ‘educational’ institutions that make people like him wealthy is a critical component to saving our society from nanny state fascists.
Students are figuring out the education value bubble and the financial industry won’t be far behind them, but the education system veritably owns the government and has carte blanche with the media, that will be a real problem. The cultural and economic damage the education sytem has done to our society by intent, and failure to accomplish their basic mission, is enormous.
We’ve got to be careful not to fetishize peer review. It’s only as good as its practitioners are competent, honest, and adhere to the fundamental principles of scientific inquiry. The IPCC reports are replete with peer-reviewed journal articles that are full of nonsense, or that have been selectively quoted or even deliberately misquoted. Don’t forget, MBH 98 (the “Mann Hockey Stick”) article was peer-reviewed, and it’s a load of bollocks.
I’ll take a non-peer-reviewed paper that has solid data, sound logic and good analysis over a piece of tripe that has been “extensively peer-reviewed” by people who are the writer’s buddies; people who have an axe to grind; people who don’t know diddly about the subject they’re reviewing; or people who, while perhaps knowledgeable and competent, are swamped and thus give the thing only a cursory once-over, and miss glaring errors.
Peer-reviewed and wrong will never, ever, EVER beat non-peer-reviewed and RIGHT.
Donna Laframboise makes a very important point here. Not only has Pachauri been telling big whoppers that IPCC uses only peer reviewed literature, but that many IPCC contributors know very well that that’s untrue yet say nothing because they know that the grey literature is essential for the IPCC to even exist.
The rot isn’t just at the top, it goes all the way through.
Don’t forget the Climategate emails. Much of the discussion was how to squeeze dissenting scientists out of the peer review process.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100017393/climategate-the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-of-anthropogenic-global-warming/
Here’s a twist. This should be an encouragement for human-hating greeno’s to vote GOP. Why? Because WE ARE the problem. You would think this could become a bandwagon for them to jump on. Hurry up the process of cleansing GAIA, vote GOP and get rid of the human race!!!!
That “vote GOP and die” thing sounds eerily like Muammar Gaddafi’s freaked-out histrionics regarding the popular uprising in Tunisia.
Global warming is like the theory that if you trade your best player for Sidney Crosby, you would have to win the Stanley Cup.
The idea that you might get two more wins and miss the playoffs by one fewer games might be the actual outcome.
The IPCC are like people who have bet everything on that Stanley Cup and still predict it in the third round of the playoffs that you missed.
(I am like the puck).
Back to the rule of law. Sue these charlatans like we would any purveyors of bad food products, any manufacturer of a faulty car, any neighbor who poisons your dog, any other person,s or companies who willingly mislead or cause financial hardship, which these liars, crooks and whatever else they are, have caused with this world wide SCAM. This whole deviant program has been to mislead and fleece monetarily, the public and reward the insiders from the start. Sounds like a case there class action lawyers, think of the money!
Peer Revue is no longer any standard…let alone gold.
The Climate Gate e-mails are evidence that what is allegedly peer-reviewed is actually PAL revued(eg MBH 98 (the “Mann Hockey Stick”)).
They are also proof that these brigands/revolutionaries were the anointed gate keepers who barred any papers that did not reflect/support their narrative.
The 2500 “scientists” on the IPCC revue process meme was early debunked as a few politicized credentialed academics backed up by uncredentialed activists.
At least the TREKKIES realized their ideology is based upon science fiction.
Just a reminder: Peer review is an editorial process, not a validation of the content.
A vote for what Chumpsky want’s for us all would look something like that new popular zombie show called the ‘walking dead’.
The gray dull communist system that he believes is the apex of human society is one where we would all WANT to die.
Last time I checked Russia was continuing to lose population at an alarming rate. Cuba is losing all it’s government jobs with nothing to replace them, North Korea … gag puke … China … would you live there? The semi communist European states are gaining only more Muslims, the rest of the population have sex strictly for fun.
But then, I think the elites on Chumpsky’s wine and cheese list want half of the human population to die off ASAP to save the world anyway … right?
What a twisted dilemma he must be living.