The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the Worlds Top Climate Expert

The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the Worlds Top Climate Expert[Download] ➽ The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the Worlds Top Climate Expert ➺ Donna Laframboise – Blooming brilliant Devastating Matt Ridley author of The Rational Optimistshines a hard light on the rotten heart of the IPCC Richard Tol Professor of the Economics of Climate Change and convening lea Teenager Who PDF ✓ Blooming brilliant Devastating Matt Ridley author of The Rational Optimistshines a hard light on the rotten heart of the IPCC Richard Tol Professor of the Economics of Climate Change and convening The Delinquent PDF/EPUB or lead author of the IPCCyou need to read this book Its implications are far reaching and the need to begin acting on Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken PDF \ them is urgent Ross McKitrick Professor of Economics University of Delinquent Teenager Who PDF Å Guelph The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IPCC performs one of the most important jobs in the world It surveys climate science research and writes a report about what it all means Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken PDF \ This report is informally known as the Climate BibleCited by governments around the world the Climate Bible is the reason carbon taxes are being introduced heating bills are rising and costly new regulations are being enacted It is why everyone thinks carbon dioxide emissions are dangerous Put simply the entire planet is in a tizzy because of a United Nations reportWhat most of us don't know is that rather than being written by a meticulous upstanding professional in business attire the Climate Bible is produced by a slapdash slovenly teenager who has trouble distinguishing right from wrongThis expose by an investigative journalist is the product of two years of research Its conclusion almost nothing we've been told about the IPCC is true. In general whenever we engage in a discussion on Climate change we often hear the apologetic admission from someone that he or she does not claim to understand the Science behind it all It is only natural that it is so because the science is uite complex for even the scientists involved in this endeavour So freuently the discussion resorts to uoting authorities on the subject to clinch an argument One authority that is widely accepted in this area by governments environmentalists journalists and the general public is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change called IPCC It is a scientific and intergovernmental body under the auspices of the United Nations set up at the reuest of member governments dedicated to the task of providing the world with an objective scientific view of climate change and its political and economic impacts IPCC does not conduct any research on its own but is supposed to have hundreds of scientists and experts on its staff who review the literature and write reports for the benefit of the rest of the world However not everyone is enamoured by IPCC or its credentials There are many scientists and informed laymen who are skeptical about IPCC’s dire predictions for the Earth’s future and call into uestion many of the conclusions arrived at by IPCC So it is logical that the Skeptics would subject IPCC’s conduct methodologies and processes to critical scrutiny before going along with their prescriptions for the world This is where author Donna Laframboise comes in as an investigative journalist In this book she looks into the bona fides of IPCCWhat are the findings of Laframboise and her support group of volunteers? I would summarize the major points as follows IPCC claims that it produces its reports only by working from peer reviewed literature However in the 2007 Climate Bible Assessment Report AR4 out of 18531 references 5587 a full 30% are non peer reviewed ones Papers which are not yet published and hence not peer reviewed yet were found in the references and their content used in the reports For an organization that is expected to be impartial and objective IPCC’s experts reviewers authors and bureaucrats have serious conflicts of interest by belonging to biased organizations like the World Wildlife Fund Greenpeace and other environmental organizations It is well known that these organizations have an agenda of promoting Anthropogenic Global Warming In the writing and preparation of the Climate Bibles AR4 and AR5 78 IPCC personnel who are also members of WWF played a role Many authors belonging to Greenpeace and other Environmental agencies as well have played roles in AR4 IPCC gives the image of being staffed with expert scientists in the preparation of its ARs But the truth is that many work as lead authors when they have not even finished their Master’s degrees or PhDs and are often uite young and inexperienced They get to such important positions of preparing AR chapters by being in agreement with the IPCC ‘party line’ on Climate Change On the other hand IPCC has knowingly discarded views contrary to their position from scientists who have proven expertise and practice in the field for over 40 years IPCC authors themselves have said that the review process leaves much to be desired Expert reviewers are asked to review without being given enough time and are often denied resources to perform their job fully It is not mandatory for authors to respond to reviewers’ comments and often passages are added to the reports well after the review is completed The negative experience of Expert reviewer Steve McIntyre a statistician is described at length IPCC’s alarmist prognosis on many issues like hurricanes tropical diseases like malaria and sea level rise are at odds with the conclusions of experts in the fields Experts like Chris Landsea and William Gray have come out saying that global warming does not cause or stronger hurricanes Malaria expert Paul Reiter of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention resigned from IPCC in protest saying that they “have done studies and challenged the alarmists – but IPCC continues to ignore the facts and perpetuates the lies” Nils Axel Mörner has worked in the field of sea level and sea level rise for than 40 years says ‘observational data does not support the IPCC’s sea level rise scenario On the contrary they seriously contradict it’ Since the Climate Bible AR3 report in 2001 IPCC insists that it is an established fact that emissions triggered climate change is adding to disaster costs This runs counter to experts’ opinion in the field Roger Pielke is an environmental studies professor at the University of Colorado in Boulder and an expert on the statistical costs of catastrophic events Pielke says that after accounting for population growth economic growth and inflation the costs of disasters are actually falling IPCC preaches the importance of de carbonizing the world through collective action But ironically it freuently chooses luxurious venues for its global meetings reuiring participants to emit vast amounts of carbon dioxide to attend the summit meetings They seem oblivious of the hypocrisyThese are some of the major red flags this book raises One can find some rebuttals for these arguments on the web from people who believe in the IPCC and its integrity To me these issues look serious and IPCC needs to come out with an official response to them if they want to be regarded as the ‘authority’ on Climate Change related issues and actions IPCC’s efforts towards de carbonizing the world can have the effect of slowing stopping or reversing economic development in the developing countries and hence can harm the world’s poor So they have a major responsibility to the world’s poor because this issue affects them than othersI would have thought that author Lafamboise could have avoided being so highly polemical in tone in this book With such an accusatory tone it forces the other side to get entrenched in their positions and makes them reluctant to give her arguments a fair go But one must concede that Climate Change debate is highly polarized and it is mostly about politics now rather than science So it is inevitable that Polemics becomes an integral part of this debate This 'exposé' of the IPCC the UN body which assesses the climate change science has polarised its readership exactly as climate change does you are either for or against it seems So the reviews are either glowing 45 star affairs or outraged 1 stars Well my middle name has always been awkward so I'm going to put this firmly in the three star box it's a lightweight little effort fluffing a small amount of actual data into a book length diatribeMuch of the supposed scandal is to be honest not very dramatic So some of the authors of the IPCC's reports are students and mere graduates? A science graduate is still a scientist and the uality or otherwise of the science is all that really matters So some of the authors are also publishing their own research which they then uote? I would expect a climate scientist worthy of inclusion in IPCC to be conducting research and publishing it in fact it would be of a worry if they weren't they are supposed to be experts on the subject after all So the head honcho makes glib statements not borne out by the facts? This happens in any big organisationAnd shock horror the IPCC is a political organisation Of course it is it's part of the UN a wholly political body funded by national governments to create an entire extra layer of bureaucracy Like any parasitic bureaucracy it has no actual political power but it has great influence and is self serving self perpetuating and effectively accountable to no oneThe author does a useful job pulling together some of the biggest outrages perpetrated by the IPCC It put forward the view that climate change was making hurricanes freuent and severe It proposed that natural disasters cost because of climate change It warned that malaria would spread because of warming It suggested that the Himalayan glaciers were melting faster than expected All of these contradicted the consensus views of experts and were not supported by hard evidenceThen there is the infamous hockey stick graph showing temperatures flat for a thousand years and a sharp recent rise thereby ignoring the well known Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age It's worth uoting the reaction of geologist Don Easterbrook on this If you look in GeoRef which is the bibliography for publications in geology you will find 485 papers on the Medieval Warm Period and you'll find 1413 on the Little Ice Age So the total number of papers in the geologic literature is 1900 And we're expected to believe that one curve based on tree rings is going to overturn all of those 1900 papers? I don't think so Several people have devoted a lot of time and effort to working out just where the hockey stick graph came from and finding the flaws in the data and analysis behind it and the IPCC has uietly dropped it from its latest publication but it was hugely influential at the timeThere have been many books published over the years about climate change on both sides of the debate and the argument has become increasingly acrimonious This book looks closely at the organisation most responsible for bringing the issues to public attention and persuading governments to do something about it Given the high stakes and costs involved and the implications for those impacted by government action it was time for an investigation of the IPCC This book uestions the process it uses its standards and methods and even its motivations There is nothing terribly profound or surprising in here but it needed to be said Three stars Excellent dismemberment of the IPCC Climate change may or may not be real but one thing is for sure the IPCC is engaged in pseudoscience and must be disbanded What a messy ugly and condescending book Apparantly Laframboise has spent several years digging for dirt on the IPCC and to be fair to her she has managed to come up with something slightly than nothing Not every recruitment decision has been spot on; not all differences of opinion between participating scientists have been handled well; not every bit of external communication in particular has been fully thought through If her motivation was to help improve the IPCC and if she had stayed clear of all that ridiculous hyperbole and biased language this book could merit two maybe even three starsA few examples On page 115 this gem occursThis is the time to remind ourselves that many IPCC authors aren't chosen for their scientific prowess They're graduate students affirmative action selections activists and virtual reality climate modelers That ladies and gentlemen is how the IPCC arrives at its 'gold standard' scienceYou don’t need to have than superficial knowledge about who actually writes the IPCC reports to know that this is a ridiculous caricatureAnotherLaframboise only refers to the key IPCC documents the Assessment Reports as the “Climate Bible” Talk about revealing your own uncontrolled biasesBottom line is that she commits a GIGANTIC non seuitur From the fact that the IPCC and its officials has conducted itself in a less than perfect way in its mundane daily business in the period in uestion it most certainly does not follow that its basic conclusions regarding the state of climate science are incorrectAll the world’s major scientific societies and the overwhelming majority of actively publishing scientists in the relevant fields say or less the same things as the IPCC If anything the IPCC’s statements and reports are restrained and cautious than the underlying scienceLaframboise obviously knows very little about climate science And I don’t think she cares She’s a libertarian hit woman on a mission This is a piece of ideologically motivated slander Stay clear Excellent investigation into the IPCC science precisely politics of climate changeThe sad story how the used to be scientists become dependent on the UN bureaucrats and have to betray climatology to make a livingThe scientific problems are deliberately left outside the book's scope there are many good books in which climatology is discussed in greater detail Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1500 Years The Attacking Ocean The Past Present and Future of Rising Sea Levels and Climate Confusion How Global Warming Hysteria Leads to Bad Science Pandering Politicians and Misguided Policies That Hurt the Poor The subject is the failure of the UN in general and the IPCC in particular to adhere to decent business practices such as declaring any conflict of interest avoiding misleading statements to the press and performing actual peer reviews on the report textMust read Laframboise stretches the IPPC as a spoilt teenager analogy a little too far but this is the best examination of the corruption of the IPPC I've read Written in very clear prose Laframboise exposes the conflicts of interest the complete lack of scientific integrity the faults in their reporting system the political agenda the power players the cover ups the whole sordid mess Also included which I haven't seen elsewhere are statements from former IPCC scientists who have figured out that the IPCC is not at all interested in the science and have left the organization in protest An utterly amazing book I think many people have a vague feeling that something isn’t uite right with the IPCC but to have it so beautifully and meticulously dissected would earn a prominent place in any textbook of anatomyThe cover should exhibit a warning to anyone with a significant degree of cardiovascular disease to read with caution A book with such a poor title tends to get overlooked But therein lies some honesty and I prefer honesty because it tends to align better with something we used to believe in called truth This author is a journalists and not just any journalist wanting not just job security but a path towards fame and fortune ie she can be trusted Here is what she confirms Climate modeling is not yet real science Greenpeace no longer has much to do with Green nor peace and has infiltrated all levels of government from the top down starting with UN's IPCC The real science is missing we are talking about pseudo science which thus far fits in somewhere between alchemy and astrology some might say witchcraft The jury is rigged and there is grave danger ahead unless the IPCC is disbanded The court of public opinion's initial verdict is flawed because the public have been brainwashed deprogramming brain washed people reuires extreme effort and a lot of time Radical groups such as anarchists anti capitalists members of the rukus society social justice warriors criminals anti establishment find the green movement a convenient platform from which to get even with the dirty and greedy corporations and politicians Last times such a diabolical situation occurred was Germany's 3rd Reich WW2 and Stalins rule in Russia as detailed in the Gulag Archipeligo We need to be very scared as to where this is going An eye opening study of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change I recommend it to all those who may have doubts about the reality of the catastrophism so prevalent whenever climate change is mentioned This is not scientific text but rather a close look at the people and the procedures behind the politics of climate change