Get PJ Media on your Apple

Decision-Based Evidence-Making: More Disgrace From UN Panel on Climate Change

They claim more certainty than ever in dangerous warming, while their own report's data contradict the statement.

by
Tom Harris and Dr. Jay Lehr

Bio

October 11, 2013 - 12:00 am
Page 1 of 2  Next ->   View as Single Page

Most science teachers undergo the unpleasant experience of catching students fudging experimental data so as to yield desired results. If the data is not easily faked, students may simply run the experiment repeatedly until the “right” data are collected. They then discard the contradictory data.

Some such cheaters make it right through the education system; perhaps some become politicians, willing to direct staff to find evidence supporting decisions they have already made for political reasons. So it goes with the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which deserves to be disbanded following the release of their latest report.

With the Summary for Policymakers of the Working Group I part of the Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) along with the draft full report now released, we have an extreme example of such “decision-based evidence-making.” Since its last Assessment Reports in 2007, the IPCC has been revealed as committing most, if not all, of the below evidence-making ploys to prop up the global warming scare:

  • Ignoring contradictory data, and acting as it does not exist.
  • Releasing preliminary results before they are confirmed when those results support already decided-upon conclusions. Corrections made later rarely get as much attention as the initial announcement and so politicians ignore them.
  • Highlighting apparently supportive information that is true, but irrelevant. In the hands of a skilled communicator, such information can be made to sound significant to the uninformed.
  • Choosing supportive information from biased and/or unqualified sources.
  • Making the underlying foundational science so complex that even qualified experts need weeks to assess it. This gives politically motivated bureaucrats a window of opportunity to make grandiose announcements that almost no one recognizes are inconsistent with the underlying data.
  • Without consulting the experts who assembled a report, strategically editing the document just before release to the public so as to support political objectives while asserting that the report is supported by experts.
  • Outright fabrication of data to support expedient conclusions.

The facts — which the newly released draft admits to — overwhelmingly support the conclusion that man’s impact on climate change is insignificant. But the IPCC asserts the exact opposite, namely that they are more convinced than ever that global warming is primarily caused by man, and that a crisis looms unless we radically change our ways. Even though their past forecasts failed to materialize, the IPCC claims an even higher level of confidence — 95%, we are told — that their conclusions are right this time around. The IPCC is hoping their theatrics distract the public, media, and government from some inconvenient truths; below is a partial list of them:

  • While man continues to emit more carbon dioxide (CO2) into the atmosphere from power plants, automobiles, and industrial activity, the Earth has not warmed for at least 15 years. None of the computer models relied on by the IPCC to forecast climate calamity predicted this temperature standstill.
  • It was warmer in many periods in the past than today, even though CO2 levels during these intervals were far lower than they are now.
  • Antarctic ice, eight times greater than Arctic ice, is not receding. Overall global ice cover has not changed significantly since satellite measurements began in 1979.
  • Global cyclone activity is now near a thirty-year low.
  • There has been no statically significant increase in the frequency or severity of extreme weather events.
  • Sea level rise is not accelerating beyond that normally expected due to the gradual warming since the end of the last glacial period 10,000 years ago.

That the IPCC is now heavily engaged in evidence-making to support the climate scare was entirely predictable. Their First Assessment Report, released in 1990, actually warned:

It is not possible at this time to attribute all, or even a large part, of the observed global-mean warming to (an) enhanced greenhouse effect on the basis of the observational data currently available.

This honesty did not stop world leaders and UN bureaucrats from creating the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit. The FCCC listed as its most important objective:

Stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.

Governments and the UN found it immaterial 21 years ago, and still do today, that no one knows what, if any, greenhouse gas level would cause climate problems. Governments comprising the UN decided we had to save the climate from man-made warming, so the UN IPCC complied. The IPCC became a political organization in which decision-based evidence-making became the norm.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
Let's see, hummm, Climate change, Green Energy and Carbon emissions! What do these have in common? Why a major paradigm shift to a Command-and-Control structure. This structure will be operated by bureaucrats not "capitalists" (catch the drift?). In other words, central planning on a Global Scale the likes of which all 197 nations in the UN have never, ever seen before. Individualism is what is being snuffed out...individual investment, risk-taking on a global scale is being side-lined for something bigger...government and United Nations control. Ever had anything good decided at the UN? What makes it possible then for "Climate Change" achieving any level of (corruption less) success? HUH? NAH! American ingenuity, excellence and dogged persistence is what should be fomented, not the state (nor UN) controls.
Think of this one FACT: a major power grab of America's power/energy sector is underway. Similiar to Obamacare's 1/6th take-over of the Health Industry. Pray. Amen. Be alert. Be awake. Join a Tea Party.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Can someone tell me why the wind industry, you know all those turbines out there, is exempt from the National Wildlife Protection Act? Those turbines kill hundreds of bald and gold eagles every year, not to even begin on the thousands of other birds which perish in their blades.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (17)
All Comments   (17)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Of course all the evidence proves global warming/climate change. It's proven science. There's a consensus. And a Nobel Prize. Any evidence that does not prove the necessary conclusion is obviously false or behaving badly. It's the UN, so we should all believe it without question, just like we believed UNICEF helped children when we saw their ads in our comic books.

Quit funding the UN.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Disgrace.

What's that when tallking about ANYTHING that comes out of the UN? Arbiter for all moral and legal? pronouncements in this modern world New Age.

The United Nations, hopeful and unfortunately too often pandered to in that Dream by the "Leaders of the FREE World" since its creation. Creation by people who call themselves "democrats and friends". But whose actions are more lthosese of the highwaymen of olden tymes of "Your money or your life". Except now its' "your money AND your life".

Or dictators, homicidal or otherwise, who have no restriction to their powers and actions. AND acept none. BY ANYONE.

Disgrace? What's that? Shame them? How is it possible to shame people who know no shame.

As long as they have the power to do as they please, with nobody saying them nay, think they'll do anything else? As long as they get the money they can and do "Take the Money and Run".
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
The UN's IPCC relied on the National Academies of Science to control scientific information.

Recently, researchers have developed a way to by-pass those gatekeepers of scientific knowledge: ResearchGate

https://www.researchgate.net/aboutus.AboutUs.html

My former students recommended it, and I find it extremely helpful.

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA Principal
Investigator for Apollo
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/Synopsis.pdf
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Sadly but predictably IPCC, which had been merely political, has now evolved to its cover up phase. In retrospect the idea of a UN-sponsored body to sponsor and assess a body of science that could have profound political consequences was flawed from the start. It has become a defensive, corrupt, and self serving agent of the global government movement.

I suppose it will lurch on, wounded though it is, holding on to its coterie of rent seekers and ideologues.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Let's see, hummm, Climate change, Green Energy and Carbon emissions! What do these have in common? Why a major paradigm shift to a Command-and-Control structure. This structure will be operated by bureaucrats not "capitalists" (catch the drift?). In other words, central planning on a Global Scale the likes of which all 197 nations in the UN have never, ever seen before. Individualism is what is being snuffed out...individual investment, risk-taking on a global scale is being side-lined for something bigger...government and United Nations control. Ever had anything good decided at the UN? What makes it possible then for "Climate Change" achieving any level of (corruption less) success? HUH? NAH! American ingenuity, excellence and dogged persistence is what should be fomented, not the state (nor UN) controls.
Think of this one FACT: a major power grab of America's power/energy sector is underway. Similiar to Obamacare's 1/6th take-over of the Health Industry. Pray. Amen. Be alert. Be awake. Join a Tea Party.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Not only do we need an alternative source of climate science info, we need to systematically review laws and regulations based on or even remotely predicated on results generated by these frauds. These laws and regs should be rescinded.

Imposing regulatory burdens on citizens and businesses based on their false proclamations is no better than some medical society advocating mandatory blood-letting prior to coverage for any proven medical procedure.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Mark Levin in his latest book has proposed a constitutional amendment that would do just what you are saying—agency regulations, laws and punishments would have to be reviewed by Congress and approved before they are enacted. And if 3/4ths of the states vote to reject the agency's regulation, law or punishment, it is gone without any review, restraining order, lawsuits or stays—it's gone.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
What can you say? Billions of dollars in grants were at stake!
What were they supposed to do, publish the truth and lose their grant money?
/sarc for the humor impaired like myself...
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
"Clearly, a UN-funded science organization was an ill-conceived idea."

The guy who has headed it up the IPCC since 2002, Rajendra Pachauri, is a carbon credit schemer and fraud on the level of aL Gore.

And the networks, Charlie Rose et al. promptly embraced the hysteria without realizing, once again, they've been manipulated.

The entire gaggle of AGW liars and dissemblers have really given science a bad name. I hope they're proud of themselves.

Here is a Harvard physicist AND would be politico that isn't completely brain dead on the topic.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/08/harvard-physicist-running-for-congress-criticizes-global-warming-hysteria/





1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Pachauri's such a fraud even his native India has disowned his 'science' findings.

I believe when having 4 or 5 revisions, the latter more skewed and nonsensical than the prior and using a grad students thesis as 'fact' will do that.

Though the world as a collective, sadly couldn't care less.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Global warming, er "climate change" is the new religion for the godless.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Since the Second World War ended, the primary purpose of government science has been to obscure the source of energy (E) stored as mass (m) in the cores of heavy atoms, some planets, ordinary stars and galaxies

Here is the rest of the story:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/Synopsis.pdf
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
This is the cruelest hoax; it had to be started by people that hate Americans, hate people from Minnesota.

I have been praying for 63 years that Minnesota would warm up, and Bingo Al Gore answers those prayers, now I learn it was just another democratic scam, lie con job.

Liberals are so frustrating to me, they are so easy to write off, but they need institutional help, maybe we could send all the Liberals, no ALL the liberals to Gitmo.

I guess that would be really a cruel torture for the local terrorist enjoying their pre allah days in Cuba.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Liberals to Gitmo is an excellent idea, only last week a federal judge ordered the release of a schizophrenic Sudanese man and now a 420 # Egyptian man is petitioning for release, so, apparently, if you're crazy and/or fat, you've got a good chance of getting out.

And speaking of crazy, could you talk to your compatriots in the 5th congressional district there in Minnesota and get them to dump the stealth jihadist Keith Ellison from the US house of representatives ? And while we're at it, the nutty US Senator Al Franken, too ? Thank you in advance.

(What, is it something in the water up there in Minnesota ?)
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
1 2 Next View All

2 Trackbacks to “Decision-Based Evidence-Making: More Disgrace From UN Panel on Climate Change”