More Unwelcome Light

From what was begun back in December with a blaze of unwelcome light, Gallopingcamel (Peter Morcombe) has emailed with some output from his AR5 Zero Order Draft (ZOD) review.

Before getting to the opinions, here’s a bit of the backstory:

On December 12, 2011 some IPCC leaked documents were published on the Internet but within a matter of hours they vanished.  Fortunately, I was able to obtain copies of the files so as to repost them on a web site created for that purpose.  These documents can also be found at David Appell’s “Quark Soup”.  On January 4, the IPCC requested by email that the ZODs be “taken down” and I complied.

In mid December, computers belonging to “Tallbloke” were seized.   Tallbloke lives in the UK where such things are more likely to happen than in the USA.  Even so I decided to postpone any confrontation with the IPCC until I had studied the documents.  With that in mind a call for volunteers was made that resulted in a small team being set up to share the task of reviewing the ZODs.  The IPCC has been informed that some chapters have been reviewed and that the files are once again available at the Gallopingcamel website.

The team has been looking at some of the chapters from Working Group I (WG1) The Physical Science Basis (chapter outline) rather than Working Group II (WG2) Impacts and Adaptation (chapter outline) not least I suspect because of the level of frustration involved in reading about impacts which are being attributed to increased CO2. With limited resources and to maximise effort they concentrated on “Executive Summaries” and chapters which were scientifically convincing  or non-controversial.   The output so far comments on Chapters 2, 3 and 4.

Here is an excerpt that sums up the issues very well.

The science presented with AR4 was mostly excellent.  Even so, the “Summaries for Policy Makers” adopted an alarmist interpretation of the science even though many of the WG1 authors expressed commendable caution.  The AR5 process seems likely to follow a similar scenario in 2013. 

One of the more obvious problems is that the WG1 authors fail to provide context that would make it clear that the changes described have been going on for thousands or even millions of years with purely natural causes.  For example sea levels have been rising at about the present rate for the last 5,000 years while ice caps have been slowly diminishing.  None of this is remarkable or alarming.  Without such context in the technical reports, politically motivated people can “spin” the top level reports to suit their agenda no matter what the science says.

You can download the review here: IPCC3b (Word Document; 4 pages).

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Climate, Comment, Review and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to More Unwelcome Light

  1. Otter says:

    ZOD?

    Are we talking the flying head or the Kryptonian?

  2. j ferguson says:

    Is there a good reason to think that this very reasonable review will have any effect?

    And thanks, GallopingCamel, for your many efforts in our behalf, including keeping E.M. out of mischief during his stay.

  3. Doug Proctor says:

    j ferguson says:
    March 24, 2012 at 1:14 pm
    Is there a good reason to think that this very reasonable review will have any effect?

    The act of checking has a positive effect. If you – they – know that others, perhaps less charitably inclined to you than your dear grandmother, are going to check for coherency, consistency with past statements, half-lies or manipulation, or plain-out untruths, you will be more careful with what you say.

    Deceit exists in the silence and the darkness. Once anyone, not just someone, can speak up about what happened when he turned on the lights, the threat of losing exactly what the deceit sought to have or get becomes real.

    Pauchari may continue with his conflict-of-interest situation at the IPCC. He may even get richer. But within some circles, to some powerful people, he now has either credibility problems or a smell about him that others don’t want. Which makes his ability to make matters worse, difficult, even if it doesn’t stop him right away.

    All hail the light. All hail the speaker.

  4. gallopingcamel says:

    j ferguson said, March 24, 2012 at 1:14 pm
    “Is there a good reason to think that this very reasonable review will have any effect?”

    The firestorm of criticism that followed the publication of AR4 in 2007 and the Copenhagen Diagnosis in 2009 does not seem to have affected the controversial chapters of AR5 so I doubt whether anything I or anyone else may say will have much effect.

    On the other hand, zeroing the US funding of the United Nations might help. Romney has already mentioned that and I would vote for him (holding my nose) if I thought he meant it.

  5. E.M.Smith says:

    Downloading the long version now…

    Congratulations GallopingCamel on becoming an Official Watchdog (Mastiff? Bulldog? 😉

    @J. Ferguson:

    What makes you think he kept me out of trouble? 🙂 (The pub recommended was a good one, BTW… fondly remembering…)

  6. Pingback: Life Takes Over | Digging in the Clay

Comments are closed.