IPCC admits – we know nothing about climate change science

Hey, they got the Nobel Peace Prize ya know, not one for science!

AJStrata over at Strata Sphere blog pulls out this tidbit from the UK Guardian.

“The Nobel prize was for peace not science … government employees will use it to negotiate changes and a redistribution of resources. It is not a scientific analysis of climate change,” said Anton Imeson, a former IPCC lead author from the Netherlands. “For the media, the IPCC assessments have become an icon for something they are not. To make sure that it does not happen again, the IPCC should change its name and become part of something else. The IPCC should have never allowed itself to be branded as a scientific organisation. It provides a review of published scientific papers but none of this is much controlled by independent scientists.”

This is quite stunning. Since the phrase global warming was not going to work for the environmental wackos, they re-branded the entire movement – a marketing move – to climate change.

Now the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change wants to re-brand themselves?

AJStrata notes…

the IPCC insiders are admitting they cannot ’settle the science’ because they don’t do science and most of their ‘message’ is crafted by policy makers (with agendas of course). No wonder the latest IPCC report is full of junk science made from political organization press releases. …

Finally the IPCC has come clean  – it doesn’t do science, it does political propaganda.

3 replies
  1. GdavidH
    GdavidH says:




    The AP article about this today however makes sure you know that global warming is alive and well and man-made…

    "The work of the climate change panel, or IPCC, is often portrayed as one massive tome. But it really is four separate reports on different aspects of global warming, written months apart by distinct groups of scientists.

    No errors have surfaced in the first and most well-known of the reports, which said the physics of a warming atmosphere and rising seas is man-made and incontrovertible. So far, four mistakes have been discovered in the second report, which attempts to translate what global warming might mean to daily lives around the world."

  2. Dimsdale
    Dimsdale says:

    "Climate change" means nothing, as does the IPCC.  "Choo Choo" Pachauri and his ilk are making policy based on flawed, or worse, false data, and the results of same will do more damage than all the AGW they can manufacture.


    To paraphrase an old saying about New England antiques, "they are selling climate change as fast as they can fake it".

Comments are closed.