Comments to the InterAcademy IPCC Review: Is It Time to Start Over?

By Chip Knappenberger -- August 3, 2010 6 Comments

In May 2010, the InterAcademy Council (IAC) was selected to “conduct an independent review of the IPCC processes and the procedures by which it prepares its assessments of climate change.” In June, economist David (P. D.) Henderson shared with MasterResource his rather critical comments submitted to the IAC which centered around the IPCC’s lax adherence to their own set of governing principles. In this article, we highlight several other submissions to the IAC that Dr. Henderson thought MasterResource readers may find particularly interesting.

Additionally, we offer a compilation of all other IAC submissions that we could find scattered across the web—a service that the IAC does not itself provide.

Background

The IAC bills itself as “a multinational organization of science academies created to produce reports on scientific, technological, and health issues related to the great global challenges of our time, providing knowledge and advice to national governments and international organizations” and as such has been asked by the United Nations to:

[E]stablish a Committee of experts from relevant fields to conduct the review and to present recommendations on possible revisions of IPCC processes and procedures.

Continue Reading

Muir Russell Findings No Solace for U.S. EPA

By Chip Knappenberger -- July 27, 2010 7 Comments

[Update 07/29/10: The EPA has announced its decision to deny all the petitions asking it to reconsider its Endangerment Finding, claiming that it could find no evidence in the Climategate emails indicating that climate change science could not be trusted. Read on to see if you think this decision is justified.]

While the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency would surely love to use the findings of the Independent Climate Change Email Inquiry (aka the Muir Russell report) to brush aside the many challenges mounted, in response to the Climategate email scandal, to the EPA’s finding that greenhouse gases endanger the public’s health and welfare (a finding which enables the EPA to regulate greenhouse gas emissions), they’ll find little in the Muir Russell report to help in their defense.

Well, I should qualify that.…

Continue Reading

‘Tipping Points’: Does the Opinion of Experts Reflect Reality?

By Chip Knappenberger -- July 6, 2010 2 Comments

Last week, an advance copy of a paper to appear in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) was released which reported that a collection of “experts” suggests that climate tipping points (codename for something bad but we don’t know exactly what) would be knocked over by 2200 if we stay on our current greenhouse gas emissions pathway (for about the next 200 years). Underlying these views is the experts’ opinions as to what the earth’s equilibrium climate sensitivity—the rise in global temperatures resulting from a doubling of the earth carbon dioxide concentration—likely is.

But do the experts opinions actually reflect the scientific knowledge on these subjects?

The answer is no.

In fact, the experts’ opinions tended towards the extreme, despite recent science which should have reeled them in.…

Continue Reading

Reforming a Flawed Process: The IPCC and Its Clients (submission to the InterAcademy Council Review)

By David Henderson -- June 16, 2010 6 Comments

[Editor note: David (P. D.) Henderson, formerly head of the Economics and Statistics Department of the OECD, is currently Chairman of the Academic Advisory Council of the London-based Global Warming Policy Foundation, which is headed by Nigel (Lord) Lawson). This is his first post at MasterResource.]

Over the past 22 years, governments everywhere and a great many outside observers have put their trust in the official expert advisory process as a whole and the IPCC process in particular.

I have come to believe that this widespread trust is unwarranted. But it is not just the IPCC process that is in question here. The basic problem of unwarranted trust goes further: it extends to the chronically biased treatment of climate change issues by responsible departments and agencies which the Panel reports to, and in nationally-based organizations which they finance.…

Continue Reading

EPA Endangerment Showdown: Should Congress Heed Russell Train’s Advice?

By -- June 1, 2010 24 Comments Continue Reading

Climate Science Policy Needs a “Team B” (Big Science + Big Government = Bad Science & Policy)

By David Schnare -- May 18, 2010 6 Comments Continue Reading

A Positive Human Influence on Global Climate? Robert Mendelsohn, Meet Gerald North!

By Robert Bradley Jr. -- May 6, 2010 36 Comments Continue Reading

Gerald North: The Non-Alarmist Alarmist? (A challenge to Texas A&M’s noted climatologist to explain himself on his recent move to Dessler-Left alarmism)

By Robert Bradley Jr. -- April 25, 2010 14 Comments Continue Reading

Moralizing Twaddle: James Hansen’s Vision of Presidential Greatness

By -- April 15, 2010 11 Comments Continue Reading

Tea Party Environmentalism

By David Schnare -- 3 Comments Continue Reading