Buy
Books
Click images for more details
Currently discussing
-
Dec 20 - julie
on
Established Fiction Ghostwriters Contribution To Fiction Writing -
Dec 6 - sexdollpartner
on
Established Fiction Ghostwriters Contribution To Fiction Writing
Links
A few sites I've stumbled across recently....
-
Science blogs
-
Political blogs
-
Other blogs
Subscribe
Bishop Hill
Copyright © 2006-2013, Bishop Hill All rights reserved.
Reader Comments (70)
Nigel Lawson
Looking at the earning potential, I'd like to nominate myself.
Nobody. Tear it down.
It was founded on unsound science and they willingly perverted the scientific method and peer review for political ends. They identified a potential problem decades ago, rigged the jury and *still* haven't implemented a solution. How crap do they have to be before people admit it was never going to work? Too many competing interest to ever have made headway.
Al Gore ?
Let Pachauri remain. The worse, the better!
Really?
Dick Lindzen.
Jeremy Clarkson.
But you *know* it'll be Morgan Freeman when the movie's made, documenting one man's heroic struggle against the forces of darkness.
Gareth says it all.
The UN is alternate universe (I have worked there). Also anybody who goes against the vested interests after taking the role, will not have a pleasant ride. Forget about big oil, there are huge investments in this IPCC policy; step out of line and some very powerful lobbying groups will be on your case with their media friends.
So in that case, somebody who is a compromise candidate (like the last one) and turns out to be corrupt and incompetent. Let them damage themselves further.
Steve Mcintyre at least we would know it was honest and truthful.
I vote with Gareth and View from the Solent.
Pauchari?
Really, get used to it, he's not leaving.
I'm laughing so hard to the comment that suggested "McIntyre" it's not funny.
clearly, at this low ebb, David Nutzuki must be brought in.
Marc Morano
I'll do it. It doesn't seem to be too taxing and I am not a climatologist either.
The best person for the job as far as the UK is concerned would be Tony Blair.
I couldn't see any of our politicians agree to give the IPCC any future commitment if that happened..
Eric Morecambe
I'm sure we can all think of some highly amusing people to head up the body as it stands but I agree with Gareth
that, as it stands, the IPCC must GO.
It does need replacing with, may I suggest, the SPCC with the S putting the science back and taking
the I in InterGovernmental OUT.
The body would have an open brief to better understand the planet's natural climate variation and our input
to that variation.
It would initially produce a report pulling together all the latest science, discarding all the dross we have been brainwashed with to date.
The summary of this report will read (with a nod to Douglas Adams) - Mostly Harmless.
I'm sure the MSM can handle that - it won't get reported as there is no scary stuff.
A serialised documentary will need to be imaginatively put together to put right the wrongs that have been done
over the past few years - starting with Roger Revelle and James Hansen then Gore's film atrocity and so on
through all the ***gates.
All copies of Gore's DVD to be removed from schools and re-cycled. All advertising promoting CO2 as evil (for marketing and scare purposes) to be withdrawn.
Nobel prizes to be returned and re-issued - discuss !!
Enough to be going on with for now. Let's all hope we have this problem very soon.
Barry Obama, with his proven track record of consensus building, and all. But he'd have to bring his birth certificate, eh!
Why isn't there an Intergovernmental Panel on Pandemics? Or Earthquakes? Or Asteroid impacts?
Maybe there are but they don't foster hysteria. (The SARS and swine flu hysteria was home-made wasn't it?)
Whatever the World does about that lot it can do about climate change. And dump the IPCC.
Scrap it, the BBC and the UN while youre on ....
I suggest we all read/re-read Thomas More's Utopia,/i. before answering. Having said that, we will never have a perfect system as long as humans are involved. I lean toward the less bureaucracy the better. Disbanding the IPCC seems like a nice option, but maybe not realistic. Given the competing interests and various stages of developed/developing countries, I can't see the IPCC ever making significant headway outside of idealougues pushing their unrealistic and misguided agendas.
Phil Jones is available.
It should be the same as for the President of the Galaxy (see Hitch Hikers)... anyone who wants to do it should be immediately prevented from doing so.
Let's stick with railway engineers - Sir Topham Hatt? Aka The Fat Controller?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fat_Controller
The IPCC is now "damaged goods". Nothing useful can be obtained from keeping it in existence.
As the whole edfice of Mann Made Global Warming comes crashing down I have to question whether there is even any need for another supranational body (especially something as discredited as the IPCC) to try to tell us all how to live our lives.
The process is so flawed, I don't know if changing the head will help. The IPCC should be disbanding and start from scratch. First of all, the surface stations should be audited and brought up to standards. Anthony Watts found that 87% of the surface stations in the US did not meet minimum standards of distance from buildings or paved surfaces. See www.surfacestations.org.. Statistical corrections to bad data is definitely not acceptable. Secondly, locations of stations throught the world has to be reviewed. Third, the methodology to calculate the global average has to be audited. Lastly, the entire peer-review process has to be reviewed. Certain issues, such as the urban heat island effect and warming impact on tropical storms should be reviewed by an impartial panel and the research replicated to provide science that we can have confidence in. It is difficult to resolve all of these issues by changing the leader at the top if the entire scientific basis is flawed. It is hard to be critical of use of non peer-reviewed WWF magazine articles because they were written by an advocacy group when the peer-reviewed papers are also written by advocates, reviewed by advocates and presented in journals staffed by advocates.
Scrap the whole thing and get them to work shovelling snow.
At the north pole.
I agree with Gareth.
The IPCC was set up to pretend it was using science to legitimise a political agenda. Its influence has been pervasive and corrupting.
If it were truly reformed, it wouldn't be dealing in the certainties required of it by the UN and politicians, so that won't happen and at best we'd see a deceptive makeover and business as usual.
Shut it down.
Nobody. Shut the whole lot down.
Members of Monty Python organized as an anarcho-syndicalist commune serving as executive on a rotating basis.
@ Jack Hughes
So send one or two to the Sierra Foothills of Califonia where I presently reside. I am getting tired of shoveling the snow that has blocked my driveway four times this year so far and it is still January
Drop the tent, fold it up and put in the warehouse with Lysenkoism and Piltdown.
The Wizard of Oz!
Inspector Clouseau
Bozo the Clown!
Oh, wait, I think he's dead.
Oh well - WHO CARES? Bozo! Bozo!
No one. End the IPCC. Hell, end the UN. Use the money to help third world people get clean water.
Roy Spencer
There is a real reason to shut down the whole UN. The IPCC is not the only tool of greedy industrialists.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0126/swinelfu.html.
Each year some 35,000 people in America die of the normal flu. About one half of that number died world wide of the Swine Flu I have no idea how many die of the "normal" flu world wide each year, but my guess is ten times the number who died of Swine Flu, if you scale up the US numbers.
The IPCC has suffered much more than a flesh wound. This is arterial bleeding with no medic in sight. Its fatal.
Control must be taken away from the United Nations and placed in the hands of adults. Good luck, I hear you say; and I agree.
Whatever comes next must be transparent ; must be free from political agenda and ideology, and must be kept honest through scientific debate. Debate, I might add, that is open to those outside the scientific community. Lets not forget that we are where we are today, in great part, due to the tireless efforts of intelligent , pain in the butt, amateurs who work from home digging and ferreting for the truth, Thank God for the internet.
I salute you and Thank you.
too bad Benny Hill isn't available.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj6gRX7-NgM&feature=related
RIP Mr. Hill!
Vaclav Kalus
errr.. RIP Mr. Benny Hill that is. Not to be confused with our hopefully thriving host.
Scrap it all and the BBC as well.
Here's a serious suggestion (and realistic) suggestion: China's lead climate negotiator, Xie Zhenhua.
This article reports that he, with signs of support from his BASIC (Brazil, South Africa, India and China) colleagues, is calling for a new and more open approach by the IPCC. Here’s an extract:
Bozo the clown is qualified.
Sooty?
Noddy
Keep Pachauri and more popcorn please!