Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Support

 

Twitter
Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« More Climategate 2 | Main | Climategate press »
Wednesday
Nov232011

Fix it or fold it

With timing that can either be seen as perfect or perfectly awful, Ross McKitrick has published a report on the IPCC under the auspices of the GWPF.

I am pleased to announce the publication of a report I have written that provides systematic detail on the procedures of the IPCC and makes the case for reforming them. My study, called What is Wrong With the IPCC? A Proposal for Radical Reform, was published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation in the U.K., and includes a foreword by the Hon. John Howard, former prime minister of Australia.

I haven't read the report - lots to read at the moment - but, as the headline suggests, McKitrick's case is that doing nothing is not an option.

McKitrick has an op-ed in the Financial Post, which includes a link to the full report.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (11)

The IPCC
Howls out the news of the world.
Baying at the moon.
============

Nov 23, 2011 at 7:51 AM | Unregistered Commenterkim

Completely OT, does anyone know what happened to neta?

www.bmreports.com/dsr.htm

Don't seem able to get at these and curious to know what is happening to wind power generation lately....

Nov 23, 2011 at 8:08 AM | Unregistered Commentermichel

I did read McKitrick's report. In my view (as I wrote in my own blogpost with same subject line, about an hour ago!) it is a perfect "companion" piece for Donna's TDT (which he sometimes cites).

The four IPCC deficiencies he highlights are:

a) An opaque process for selecting Lead Authors
b) The absence of any binding requirement for incorporating the full range of views
c) Intellectual conflicts of interest
d) Loopholes and gaps in the peer review sequence

Full report is here

P.S. I'm on the "perfect timing" side :-)

Nov 23, 2011 at 8:25 AM | Unregistered Commenterhro001

Chris Huhne was already 'blasting' the report yesterday, courtesy of Damian Carrington, though it was hard to hear through the other noise.

Nov 23, 2011 at 8:57 AM | Unregistered CommenterRichard Drake

The IPCC can never be reformed whilst its charter restricts it to researching the effects of man on climate. What is needed is a body dedicated to coordinating climate change research per se.

Nov 23, 2011 at 9:48 AM | Unregistered CommenterPeter Stroud

michel

Try:-

http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

Nov 23, 2011 at 10:02 AM | Unregistered CommenterGreen Sand

I'm glad you're talking about the GWPF today. It seems Benny Peiser has himself been refusing FOI requests:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/22/chris-huhne-lawson-think-tank

And we still don't know who funds them. Why are they so secretive about it......

Nov 23, 2011 at 10:10 AM | Unregistered CommenterZedsDeadBed

Zed

Read the article more carefully. You may have missed this bit:

"there is no suggestion Peiser failed to comply with FoI rules."

Nov 23, 2011 at 10:28 AM | Unregistered CommenterDreadnought

Michel

http://www.bmreports.com/ works for me in Firefox, and on IE at work

Nov 23, 2011 at 11:32 AM | Unregistered CommenterNeil Wilkinson

http://www.bmreports.com/bsp/bsp_home.htm

This is the address I use for neta.

Nov 23, 2011 at 1:18 PM | Unregistered Commentermeltemian

Zed
Who funds WWF?
Apart from the 73 million dollars they have had in government grants over the last two years, their financial statement makes no mention of where the rest of their money comes from and I can't find the information anywhere else on their website.
Since they have a serious "in" to the deliberations of the IPCC which is supposedly some sort of scientific body that advises governments and since about ¼ of their revenues come from governments I would have thought the taxpayer has some sort of right to know where the rest of their money comes from. I mean you never know who else they might be in bed with.
Unless, of course, you don't think there is any good reason why they should make that information public in which case I would defend the GWPF's right to take the same decision.
Fair enough?

Nov 23, 2011 at 5:34 PM | Unregistered CommenterMike Jackson

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>