draw bridge  
Science Home
  fan belt  
     

Home
Detailed Pages
▼▼▼  
 

Corruption Of Science  3

 
IPCC — Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

 
Call it propaganda, not science
 

The IPCC is controlled by political hacks who override the scientists with a predetermined agenda. Calling it science is a fraud upon the public. Real scientists and critics are kicked out of the process.

As scientific arguments for greenhouse gasses break down, the promoters of the cause revert to the IPCC as their undisputed authority on the subject. There is no validity in replacing science with authority. Science requires totally objective evaluation, constantly, all the time. Replacing that process with ignorant political hacks is how fraud is produced, not how science is produced.
 

Dr Vincent Gray, a member of the UN IPCC Expert Reviewers Panel since its inception, calls for abolishing the IPCC.

Excerpt: The whole process is a swindle, The IPCC from the beginning was given the licence to use whatever methods would be necessary to provide "evidence" that carbon dioxide increases are harming the climate, even if this involves manipulation of dubious data and using peoples' opinions instead of science to "prove" their case.

The disappearance of the IPCC in disgrace is not only desirable but inevitable. The reason is, that the world will slowly realise that the "predictions" emanating from the IPCC will not happen. The absence of any "global warming" for the past eight years is just the beginning. Sooner or later all of us will come to realise that this organisation, and the thinking behind it, is phony. Unfortunately severe economic damage is likely to be done by its influence before that happens.

I have been an "Expert Reviewer" for the IPCC right from the start and I have submitted a very large number of comments on their drafts. It has recently been revealed that I submitted 1,898 comments on the Final Draft of the current Report. Over the period I have made an intensive study of the data and procedures used by IPCC contributors throughout their whole study range. I have a large library of reprints, books and comments and have published many comments of my own in published papers, a book, and in my occasional newsletter, the current number being 157.

I began with a belief in scientific ethics, that scientists would answer queries honestly, that scientific argument would take place purely on the basis of facts, logic and established scientific and mathematical principles.

Right from the beginning I have had difficulty with this procedure. Penetrating questions often ended without any answer. Comments on the IPCC drafts were rejected without explanation, and attempts to pursue the matter were frustrated indefinitely.

Over the years, as I have learned more about the data and procedures of the IPCC I have found increasing opposition by them to providing explanations, until I have been forced to the conclusion that for significant parts of the work of the IPCC, the data collection and scientific methods employed are unsound. Resistance to all efforts to try and discuss or rectify these problems has convinced me that normal scientific procedures are not only rejected by the IPCC, but that this practice is endemic, and was part of the organization from the very beginning. I therefore consider that the IPCC is fundamentally corrupt. The only "reform" I could envisage, would be its abolition.

The two main "scientific" claims of the IPCC are the claim that "the globe is warming" and "Increases in carbon dioxide emissions are responsible". Evidence for both of these claims is fatally flawed.

 
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is supposedly the last word on global warming. Those who promote global warming hype declare IPCC reports to be peer reviewed science, and peer reviewed science to be infallible. On that basis, critics are attacked for putting themselves above the unquestionable word of science.

But the IPCC is controlled by political hacks who reshape the science for their agenda. There is no place in science for arbitrary authority—least of all a subject as complex as climate change.

Alexander Cockburn, editor of Counterpunch, is a liberal journalist who describes the position of the critics fairly well. He says, "To identify either the government-funded climate modelers or their political shock troops, the IPCC's panelists, with scientific rigor and objectivity is as unrealistic as detecting the same attributes in a craniologist financed by Lombroso studying a murderer's head in a nineteenth-century prison for the criminally insane."
http://www.counterpunch.org/
cockburn05122007.html

On another page, he adds, "Professor Fredrik Seitz, former chairman of the American Science Academy, wrote in the Wall Street Journal already the 12th of June 1996 about a major deception on global warming: "I have never before witnessed a more disturbing corruption of the peer-review process than the events that led to this IPCC report."
http://www.counterpunch.org/
cockburn05262007.html

 

Cool Aid Stand Analogy

The IPCC is analogous to the government creating a group to sell Cool Aid and saying, do whatever it takes to make money. Since making money at selling Cool Aid is not an easy thing to do, they resort to fraud, extortion and thievery.


External Links:
History of the IPCC
Dissidents Against Dogma
Why the IPCC Should be Disbanded
Modeling is Useless for Predicting — Pielke
IPCC Loss of Credibility — Michael Fox, October 21, 2009
Pachauri Whitewash — Delingpole
Glaciergate by IPCC
Amazongate by IPCC
Obstructionist Science


Fakery Of Peer Review

What Corruption Is      TOP     

     top       

 

Radiative Transfer Equations
 
Invalid Measurements
 
Absorption Without Emission
 
Quotes By Incompetents
 
Other Factors
 
Stefan-Boltzmann Constant
 
Joule's Constant
 
Origins Of Errors
 
Relativity Fraud
 
Nuclear Fusion
 
Quantum Mechanics
 
ATP Theory
 
Fossil Fuels
 
Electricity Problem
 
Renewable Energy
 
Electric Vehicles
 
Fake Efficiency
 
Gravity Waves
 
Firing Scientists
 
Peer Review Fraud
 
IPCC
 

     

 

 
 
 Home Page 
 
 Moral Philosophy 
 
 Political Philosophy 

 
 
 Sociology   
 
   News Pages   
 
   Detailed Pages