Weather Banter - View Single Post

Ouroboros Rex

bw wrote:
"Eric Gisin" wrote in message
...
http://masterresource.org/?feed=rss2
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/04/sc...h/04clima.html

August 9, 2009, 23:00:34 | jtaylor
The August 4 issue of the New York Times features a rather
illuminating article by Andrew Revkin -
the Times' climate reporter - on sentiment within the ranks of the
IPCC as that organization begins
work on its upcoming 2014 report. Revkin reports that the IPCC's
scientists are frustrated that
the world's governments - even those that are led by politicians who
habitually give end-is-near
speeches about global warming - are not taking the sorts of policy
actions the organization thinks
are necessary to head-off global catastrophe. Hence, a growing
number of scientists want the IPCC
to be more explicit and prescriptive with regards to public policy,
less inhibited when discussing
scientific issues where a great deal of uncertainty exists, more
concerned with best practices
pertaining to public risk management, and more politically sensitive
about the issues that are
examined at-length in the upcoming report.

In other words, Revkin reports that the IPCC wants to spend less
time on science in their next
report than they have in past reports and more time on issues for
which it has no relevant
expertise or comparative advantage. Of course, Revkin doesn't put it
quite that way, but that's
the unmistakable implication of what he reports.

Whether that's good or bad depends, of course, on your point of view.

The IPCC is an arm of the UNITED NATIONS. Asking the IPCC for a
science assessment of climate is like asking Al Capone for an
assessment of crime in Chicago.

translation: droooool