Published on December 1st, 20121
What About the Panel on Climate Change? How the IPCC Overlooked Reports from Scientists
The IPCC was established by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) in 1988, to provide the world with a clear scientific view on the current state of knowledge in climate change and its potential environmental and socio-economic impact. According to UN officials, the IPCC performs one of the most important jobs in the world. It doesn’t do any science by itself, but have the delegates to survey the scientific literature regarding climate, thus deciding what to put into the IPCC reports (informally called “The Climate Bible”).
It is stated that this report is written by thousands of the world’s experts, and that these experts all agree in its conclusions. The IPCC was also crowned with the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007. However in 2005 a small article in Science described a conflict between Chris Landsea (a hurricane expert with the National Oceanic and Atmispheric Administration in Miami) and one of the editors. Landsea had stated that the climate debate had become politicized.
William M. “Bill” Gray, Emeritus Professor of Atmospheric Science at Colorado State University (CSU), and head of the Tropical Meteorology Project at CSU’s Department of Atmospheric Sciences, has confirmed Chris Landsea’s view. Gray said: “Despite my 50 years of meteorology experience and my many years of involvement in seasonal hurricane and climate prediction, I have never been asked for input on any of the [IPCC] reports. I don’t think global warming causes more (or stronger) hurricanes. They know my views and do not wish to have to deal with them.”
Six months prior to Gray’s statement (In a US Senate Committee) the IPCC participant and malaria expert Paul Reiter, (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and professor of entomology and tropical disease at the Pasteur Institute), had a similar statement before a committee in the British House of Lords. His expertise in a field he had specialized for more than 40 years – was diseases that are spread by mosquitoes. According to him, the people who had been writing about those diseases in the “Climate Bible”, were not experts. While a large portion of the health chapter in the 1995 edition dealt with malaria, Reiter pointed out that “not one of the lead authors had ever written a research paper on the subject!” He said that only those with limited knowledge within this field could have produced such an “amateurish” work.
Paul Reiter resigned from the IPCC and had to threaten legal action to have his name removed from the IPCC. Leaving IPCC he said:
“That is how they make it seem that all the top scientists are agreed. … We have done the studies and challenged the alarmists – but they continue to ignore the facts, and perpetuate the lies.”
The story does not end with hurricanes and malaria. The former president of a Commission on Sea Level Change, Nils-Axel Mörner, has worked in the field of sea level and sea level rise for more than 40 years. He has been president of the INQUA Commission on Sea Level Changes and Coastal Evolution, 1999-2003. He has addressed the House of Lords in 2005. There he presented this figure:
He called attention to the disparity between what genuine sea level specialists think and what those who write IPCC reports believe. He said that those in the second group lack hands-on expertise. Instead, they attempt to predict the future via mathematical formulas that have been fed into computers (computer modeling).
His conclusion: observational data do not support the IPCC’s sea level rise scenario. On the contrary, they seriously contradict it. He argues that there are small chances that the world will be become extensively flooded in the near future. Mörner further argues that there are more urgent natural problems to consider, like for example, tsunamis, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions.
*Cover photo by Peter Blanchard, second photo by Hellolm Nik