Business, Economics, Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Science And Society

The Great IPCC Meltdown

6 Comments

…continues:

When the glacier story broke, IPCC apologists returned over and over again to a saving grace. The bogus glacier report appeared in the body of the IPCC document, but not in the much more carefully vetted Synthesis Report, in which the IPCC’s senior leadership made its specific recommendations to world leaders. So it didn’t matter that much, the apologists told us, and we can still trust the rigorously checked and reviewed Synthesis Report.

But that’s where the African rain crisis prediction is found — in the supposedly sacrosanct Synthesis Report.

So: the Synthesis Report contains a major scare prediction — 50% shortfall in North African food production just ten years from now — and there is no serious, peer-reviewed evidence that the prediction is true.

But there’s more. Much, much more.

You wonder at what point, if any, the warm-monger worshippers will realize that they’ve been scammed?

And as Mark Steyn notes (again), it’s not just a science scandal, it’s a scandal of gross journalism malpractice.

[Update a few minutes later]

Time to follow the money.

6 thoughts on “The Great IPCC Meltdown”

  1. “You wonder at what point, if any, the warm-monger worshippers will realize that they’ve been scammed?”

    There’s no point at which they’ll admit it, and I don’t think they’ll even realize it anytime soon.

    To do so would destroy their world view of themselves.

  2. There probably will be a major food production decline in the coming years. But it will not be from global warming. It will be from biofuels and decreases in temperature in the Northern Hemisphere freezing crops as the solar cycle comes to a minimum.

  3. Pingback: And Climaquiddick Continues « Tai-Chi Policy

  5. I’m sure many prominent people, when caught behaving in seriously questionable ways, have considered suicide. While I’d love to see him and others like him frog-marched to prison, it’s unlikely to happen. They acted in ways that should permanently destroy their credibility. Not only should they be disqualified from future grants for their “research”, they should be investigated for possible fraud charges.

Comments are closed.