| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Lurid Crime Tales- |
| "Leaked emails won't harm UN climate body" says chairman |
| 2009-11-30 |
| There is "virtually no possibility" of a few scientists biasing the advice given to governments by the UN's top global warming body, its chair said today. However a hundred of so Grant-Seekers now.... Rajendra Pachauri defended the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in the wake of apparent suggestions in emails between climate scientists at the University of East Anglia that they had prevented work they did not agree with from being included in the panel's fourth assessment report, which was published in 2007. The emails were made public this month after a hacker illegally obtained them from servers at the university. Pachauri said the large number of pro-climate-change contributors and rigorous peer review mechanism adopted by the IPCC meant that any bias would be rapidly uncovered. That would be the peer review done only by Climate change Activists - no critical review allowed. Besides after they see how we bludgeoned the data to match our pre-concieved conclusions nobody would dare speak out. "The processes in the IPCC are so robust, so inclusive, that even if an author or two has a particular bias it is completely unlikely that bias will find its way into the IPCC report," he said. "Every single comment that an expert reviewer provides has to be answered either by acceptance of the comment, or if it is not accepted, the reasons have to be clearly specified. Or by trashing the reputation of the 'expert reviewer' such that they will never work in the field again. And shunning any publication who would publish anything against the Holy Word. So I think it is a very transparent, a very comprehensive process which insures that even if someone wants to leave out a piece of peer reviewed literature there is virtually no possibility of that happening." However leaving out any critical peer reviews themselves is another story.... The IPCC, which was set up by the UN in 1988, is the world's leading authority on climate change. It advises governments on the science behind the problem and was awarded the Nobel peace prize along with Al Gore in 2007. I'd say that was pretty damning in itself Pachauri was responding to one email from 2004 in which Professor Phil Jones, the head of the climatic research unit at UEA, said of two papers he regarded as flawed: "I can't see either ... being in the next Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report. Kevin [Trenberth] and I will keep them out somehow -- even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!" Pachauri said it was not clear whether the wording of the emails reflected the scientists' intended actions, but said: "I really think people should be discreet ... in this day and age anything you write, even privately, could become public and to put anything down in writing is, to say the least, indiscreet ... Translation: FOR GODS SAKE DON'T WRITE ANY OF OUR DELIBERATIONS DOWN! SOMEONE MIGHT FIND OUT! Oh and HIDE OR DELETE THE DATA. It is another matter to talk about this to your friends on the telephone or person to person but to put it down in writing was indiscreet. If someone was to say something like this in an IPCC authors' meeting then there are others who would chew him up." Jones has denied any suggestion that he tried to suppress scientific evidence he disagreed with or that he manipulated data. Pachauri said he doubted that trust in the IPCC would be damaged by the affair. "People who are aware of how the IPCC functions And if they don't know - the emails, modified and/or deleted data will show them and are appreciative of the credibility that the IPCC has attained will probably not be swayed by an incident of this kind," he said. He pointed out that five days after the emails were made public, Barack Obama announced a major commitment to cutting greenhouse gas emissions ahead of the UN climate summit in Copenhagen. You consider Barack Obama qualified to judge Climate data? |
| Posted by:CrazyFool |
| #8 It is unseemly. I do purely adore you, Free Radical. :-) Bright Pebbles, please translate "WGTHTKTAW?" for those of us not at all good at such things. Thanks! |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2009-11-30 22:24 |
| #7 WGTHTKTAW? |
| Posted by: Bright Pebbles 2009-11-30 18:39 |
| #6 I have some snake oil for sale. It has been peer reviewed by the finest snake oil scientists I could buy. It is still snake oil. |
| Posted by: Skunky Glins**** 2009-11-30 18:31 |
| #5 The chair of the UN's top global warming body should not act as if he is an Outright Mental Defective in Full Flight From Reality. It is unseemly. |
| Posted by: Free Radical 2009-11-30 17:42 |
| #4 The taxpayer funded "gravy train" is pulling out of the depot. These are not scientists but political laykeys and the process is not science but deliberate deception driven by an agenda. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2009-11-30 16:50 |
| #3 On the U.N. Climate Ship, there's "full speed ahead" and "FULL STUPID AHEAD". |
| Posted by: whatadeal 2009-11-30 15:55 |
| #2 Translation: "we don't give a damn". |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2009-11-30 15:12 |
| #1 The emails were made public this month after a hacker illegally obtained them... I highly doubt this. The files were more likely leaked by an insider/whistleblower. |
| Posted by: Parabellum 2009-11-30 14:56 |