IPCC

Tag archives for IPCC

So says La Curry. She is only two years behind the times. Or maybe a year and a half. To be fair, that is only the headline. But the rest of the content is what you’d expect from a shark-jumper. I cant really be bothered to analyse it, unless anyone out there is unable to…

Which is a bit of a mouthful, so they call it SREX. In the traditional and slightly unlovely IPCC way, you can read the SPM now but will have to wait awhile for the report. But it provides enough for me to mount my hobby horses, so giddy-up! The first point is that extremes are…

What to do with the IPCC

So, I didn’t like the IAC prescription for the IPCC. So I need my own. And I forgot that I already had one. PK said it well in the comments: How many IPCC reports does it take to screw in a light bulb? The bureaucratic solution for inefficient bureaucracy always seems to be more bureaucracy.…

IAC review of the IPCC

It am all de rage, as they say. But is it any good? And who are the IAC anyway? Go on, hands up, before they were asked to do this: had anyone heard of them? Thought not: I certainly hadn’t. This is an organisation so well-known that the wikipedia article on [[IAC]] (note: that is…

Zorita scents gravy

Every cloud has a silver lining, and it looks like Zorita is jockeying for some of the silver: the Future of IPCC apparently is to morph into one of those nice International agencies which pay so well and are headquarted in rather nice cities, staffed by… well, clearly by the likes of independent-minded folk such…

Letter from Holland

There is a good letter from some Dutch scientists at Open brief Nederlandse klimaatonderzoekers over IPCC en over fouten in Klimaatrapport 2007 (don’t worry, its in English too). I think it does a good job of setting the recent “IPCC is utterly corrupt / mistaken / broken / infiltrated by space aliens / needs to…

The IPCC: dissolve it or not?

A couple of people have asked me this – I think it came up in Ask Stoat (I haven’t forgotten, you know, just busy). Anyway, it seems like a great post – bound to be flamebait and get my comment count soaring! You won’t be too shocked to learn that I think it should be…

Anatomy of IPCC’s Mistake on Himalayan Glaciers and Year 2035″ is well worth a read. Especially interesting is their taking-apart of the revisions of 10.6.2 – in brief, these mistakes were spotted before tape-out but those revising that section couldn’t be bothered to make any changes (and/or didn’t want to quote some embarassingly good research…

Well, he is this one. But not this one. In the news, he is Former IPCC Leader Says Climategate Scientists “Manipulated data.” and the “head of the International Technical Review Panel for IPCC’s first report”. The latter is what interests me. What is it? I am just about old enough to remember IPCC ’90, and…

Reader enragedparrot asks the rather sensible question, which appears to have been somewhat neglected in the vast war of words of 2035, 2350, and quite what is the source for what: if 2035 is badly wrong, what is the right date? The answer, of course, is that I don’t know. But I may be able…