A Quote by Phil Jones
You might want to check with the IPCC Bureau. I've been told that IPCC is above national FOI Acts. One way to cover yourself and all those working in AR5 [the upcoming IPCC Fifth Assessment Report] would be to delete all e-mails at the end of the process. Hard to do, as not everybody will remember it.
Related Quotes
The same individuals who are doing primary research in the role of humans on the climate system are then permitted to lead the [IPCC] assessment! There should be an outcry on this obvious conflict of interest, but to date either few recognize this conflict, or see that since the recommendations of the IPCC fit their policy and political agenda, they chose to ignore this conflict. In either case, scientific rigor has been sacrificed and poor policy and political decisions will inevitably follow.
I am withdrawing because I have come to view the part of the IPCC to which my expertise is relevant as having become politicized. In addition, when I have raised my concerns to the IPCC leadership, their response was simply to dismiss my concerns.
The manufactured consensus of the IPCC has had the unintended consequences of distorting the science, elevating the voices of scientists that dispute the consensus, and motivating actions by the consensus scientists and their supporters that have diminished the public's trust in the IPCC.
Why is there such insistence that AGW has occurred and needs drastic solutions? This is a puzzle, but my short answer is that the IPCC has been built on the AGW proposition and of course keeps plugging it, whatever the data say. The IPCC has considerable clout. Most people shy off inspecting the evidence because it looks like science and must therefore be hard. The media have been captured by AGW (it makes for great stories), the environmental movement and the Greens love it, and business is reluctant to get involved.
Climate change is real and anthropogenic; and the 5th Assessment Report of the IPCC has left the deniers little room for manoeuvre, but they are swiftly morphing into a new breed that accept the climate is changing but like to suggest this may have positive benefits.
In my more than 60 years as a member of the American scientific community, including service as president of both the National Academy of Sciences and the American Physical Society, I have never witnessed a more disturbing corruption of the peer-review process than the events that led to this IPCC report.
...I can't see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin [Trenberth] and I will keep them out somehow, even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!
Every climate scientist has his or her own views on some issues that differ from the mainstream in detail. But the broad findings of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) have general support amongst scientists with relevant specialist expertise. The broad wisdom of the IPCC is strongly contested by a small number, and a small minority, of reputed climate scientists. It is not contested by the large majority of specialists, and by the leaders of the relevant learned academies in the countries of great scientific accomplishment.
I personally cannot in good faith continue to contribute to a process [IPCC process] that I view as both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound.
All handling by IPCC of the Sea Level questions have been done in a way that cannot be accepted and that certainly not concur with modern knowledge of the mode and mechanism of sea level changes.
Although I am not a climatologist, it has been interesting to observe climatology from the point of view of an arctic scientist. In order for the field of climatology and IPCC to be healthy, I want to provide a few criticisms, which I hope are constructive."
The IPCC summary for policymakers is used to scare politicians and goad the public into action. The UN is all about politics.
We are now at the point in the age of global warming hysteria where the IPCC global warming theory has crashed into the hard reality of observations.
The IPCC - and all the mainstream media and environmental extremists who cite it uncritically - really have become a joke in the scientific community.
The IPCC doesn't do any research itself. We only develop our assessments on the basis of peer-reviewed literature.
At a recent conference, a colleague told one of us that in IPCC discussions, some scientists have been reluctant to make strong claims about the scientific evidence, lest contrarians "attack us". Another said that she'd rather err on the side of conservatism in her estimates, because then she feels more "secure."
Related Authors
Allen Iverson Quotes
American
Athlete
Andy Murray Quotes
Scottish
Athlete
CM Punk Quotes
American
Athlete
Conor McGregor Quotes
Irish
Athlete
Georges St-Pierre Quotes
Canadian
Athlete
Jack LaLanne Quotes
American
Athlete
Jillian Michaels Quotes
American
Athlete
Jon Jones Quotes
American
Athlete
Kenny Smith Quotes
American
Athlete
Kevin Durant Quotes
American
Athlete
Rafael Nadal Quotes
Spanish
Athlete
Ronda Rousey Quotes
American
Athlete
Scottie Pippen Quotes
American
Athlete
Shaquille O'Neal Quotes
American
Athlete
Stephen Curry Quotes
American
Athlete
Usain Bolt Quotes
Jamaican
Athlete