Am I still allowed to question climate change?

[Tony]

You are making quite a leap of imagination there.

[convert]

You are making quite a leap of imagination there.

 

You're quite right. I've amended my post.

[convert]

Roll up, roll up and place your bets!

 

How long until the IPCC have a new leader?

 

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8479795.stm

 

The chairman of the UN's climate science body said he would not resign in the wake of a row about a mistake on glaciers that appeared in a key report.

 

Rajendra Pachauri told BBC News: "I am not going to stand down, I am going to stand up."

 

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) admitted that it had made a mistake in asserting that Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035.

 

Critics say the mistake has damaged the scientific credibility of the IPCC.

 

[Wildcat]

I hate to say this wildcat, but your approach seems to be to discredit anything that shows different to what you believe, but refuse to admit anything wrong with the sources that go along with your view, such as saying that errors in the IPCC report don't really matter.

 

To quote your sig "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts. Bertrand Russell"

 

The errors in the IPCC report don't really matter because the mistake was a minor one, that wasn't part of the summary and isn't a part of what people are talking about when they talk about the scientific consensus it expresses.

 

I discredit what is there to be discredited. It is not my fault the arguments put forward by the sceptics are so lame.

[Wildcat]

Roll up, roll up and place your bets!

 

How long until the IPCC have a new leader?

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8479795.stm

 

It would be totally absurd if he was to go over a load of nothing, but it isn't of much relevance to the science he was a political appointment of sceptical republicans anyway.

Edited January 25, 2010 by Wildcat

[Wildcat]

What about some of the more significant IPCC errors?

 

Like their underestimation of CO2 levels?, the observed 3.4 mm per year sea level rise compared with the 1.9 mm the IPCC reported? the observed 40% greater sea ice melting compared to what they reported.

 

http://www.skepticalscience.com/ipcc-scientific-consensus.htm

 

The IPCC have been shown to have made plenty of mistakes of underestimation, yet for some reason only the one where they failed to follow the process of using peer reviewed reports has been the one seized upon.

 

The moral to this story is to stick with peer reviewed reports, and ignore the non-peer reviewed ones, all reasons to reject the sceptics arguments.

[truman]

The errors in the IPCC report don't really matter .

 

Of course not,what a surprise you should say that... Was that report peer reviewed?

[convert]

Don't worry the tipping point on CO2 is almost here.

 

Then the IPCC and the pro AGW camp will be forced to look for other avenues to legislate and tax us upon.

 

 

Such as Ocean acidification; in fact there's a team of researchers from the UEA (of CRU and climategate 'fame') heading over to the Antarctic as part of the ANDREX project in March

[Wildcat]

Of course not,what a surprise you should say that... Was that report peer reviewed?

 

It had 2,500 reviewers. Pretty impressive.

[Wildcat]

An interesting list of hypocrisies:

http://akwag.blogspot.com/2009/12/climate-of-hypocrisy.html