The plot thickens. Some parts of this letter are strongly worded. It is clear that there’s not much tolerance for the latest set of shenanigans from Pachauri.
Steve McIntyre writes:
Judy Curry draws attention to a letter from the Chairman of the Oversight Subcomittee of the US Science Committee to the UN Chairman asking that IPCC not be permitted to delay implementation of Conflict of Interest policy until after AR5 – press release here.
Here’s the image of the letter (link to full letter follows)
Here the link to the letter:
This amounts to a “second request” notice from the committee [second this year, with the first request in Feb 2010]. In the letter, Broun wrote that it is “imperative for the IPCC to adopt a rigorous conflict of interest policy before its 34th Session, tentatively scheduled to take place in January 2012.”
It would seem to me that this is not going to go away, and if past history is any indication, the IPCC will allow it to fester to an infection before seeking treatment.
I predict that the pus that is going to come out of it, once lanced, will be of the most smelly sorts.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Thanks smokey -seems confirmed that the head of the UN was fully appraised of the concerns in February 2010 and chose to ignore those requests, for the UN to take a firm and uncompromising stand on the very practices that have been revealed in the present scandal, of agents within the IPCC process pushing their own profitable wheelbarrow of corrupt information.
High minded American Climate Scientists should en masse walk out of the IPCC process in a professional protest at such corrupt practices. This action should be backed by ALL professional scientific associations within the US.
Perhaps we need to write to all those :”chosen” to participate suggesting they withdraw until the system is corruption proofed.
Ross said:
June 20, 2011 at 5:19 pm
> Why doesn’t the US simply demand appropriate “truth, justice and the American way”…
Truth, justice, and the American way — it’s not enough anymore:
http://tinyurl.com/3vp2pum
Supermanbearpig
next we’ll have moonBatman
Let’s see, the people with conflicts of interest want to produce a report to be used in imposing sweeping government policies but want their conflicts hidden until after they provide the report.
Why doesn’t that disqualify all of them from participating in any way?
Pachauri won’t stop. He’s infected and invested.
The UN won’t stop. Its accepted and infected.
Lets move on to the solar story. Big news last week. The feds have finally released their funded studies of the sun, that took two years to convince them to fund. Do you believe it? Three federal agencies actually released results that all agree that the Sun is going dormant for awhile.
Advocacy groups or members have no place in a scientific entity. Their very existence spells partiality. You can start to see which “scientific” unions, organizations and journals are not scientific at all by their silence in this matter of the IPCC/UNEP/EPA concerning conflict of interests.
Thank goodness there are a few from science starting to step forward.
Cracks in the wall are becoming seismic shifts, no doubt due to global warming.
John Whitman says: June 20, 2011 at 10:35 pm
“Where are the similar letters from all the science institutes, academies and societies around the world?”
They are living in the fairytale world where the world is still warming, where sunspots are just speckles on a distant star which circles around their world and “science” is just a sausage machine of “scare in -> loads of money out”.
Mango
Richard Black gets a good kicking here from Dr David Whitehouse (GWPF)
http://www.thegwpf.org/the-observatory/3259-solar-science-little-ice-ages-and-journalism.html
@ur momisugly uber
Ceaucescu in Romania thought the same. Until reality kicked in about half way through this speech.
Even those most deluded by their own propaganda realise their mistake in the end.
All right. This is clearly actionable! I urge each of the US of A WUWT readers to write, call, and email their Representative and Senators, describing the failures of the UN-IPCC to abide by the IAC recommendations for transparency and full disclosure of Conflicts Of Interest within the UN-IPCC organization. Urge your Congressmen to sponsor and support extreme funding cuts to the UN, unless the Conflict Of Interest measures are fully implemented and verified by an independent third party, comprised of WUWT regulars!
C’mon folks. Enough with the gritching and belly aching about their skullduggery. Take action, to hit ’em where it really hurts! Do it… do it today.
He must be thinking, well I’ve got away with it for this long, so why stop now ? The UN does like to believe it is beholden to no-one.
This is hilarious, in the deeply ironic sense. Pachouri, amongst other jobs for multiple oil companies, had this duty with the Oil and Natural Gas Company -2006-2009
Member of Audit & Ethics Committee
HT Jimbo.
I`m no longer sure that it is arrogance that drives the likes of Pachauri. Ann Widdecombe seems to have it right:
“How long will it be before the voice of reason prevails over the cynical cowardice of climate-change scientists who are faced with increasing evidence that they have it wrong but are too deeply dependent on huge government spending to admit it?”
Read more: http://www.express.co.uk/ourcomments/view/252729/Ann-WiddecombeNo-more-lies-on-the-global-climate-front#ixzz1PtkqQh5C
We all know how corrupt the UNIPCC process is ever sinec its second report. You’re included in the reports, you reviewd them, said they were crap, but who cares, they published them anyway & put your name at the bottom as endorsing it because you “took part”! The idiots couldn’t even decide on a proper nomenclature system for each report because the bureaucrats were so busy getting trendy & excited over their apparent success in screwing the western free democracies, eg. FAR, SAR ,TAR, then they realised their mistake, so coined AR4, & now AR5, cue James Earl Jones style voice-over for the promo video!!! If they’d thought about it they’d just have started with AR1 & no problems. Anyhow, Ban has ignored letters from other scientists before so why people will think this corrupt little so’n so is going to respond I have no idea! He will do the “just & proper” thing & totally ignore it. If the IPCC does fall apart, don’t worry, it will be everyone else’s fault & not theirs, they will blame Big Oil, the USA, India, China, the little green men from Mars, you, me, everyone, but not themselves, etc. Just you wait & see. I bid you farewell, Strength though Unity, commrades! I’m off to enjoy what’s left of the interglacial :-))
Thanks, Smokey. The attachment shows that some in high places have their heads on straight!
I should be amazed that little Ban Ki Moon is ignoring this, but I am totally unsurprised. The entire UN is a corrupt mass held together by graft, corruption, favours and the turning of blind eyes.
IPCC can’t do it. They exist solely on conflict of interest. Take that away from them and you’ve taken the teeth
out of the beast.
Look for the real point of leverage here. UN has leverage on Pachauri. Congress has leverage on UN. Voters have leverage on Congress. So, sure, keep those cards and letters coming, folks.
But consider also: lawsuits. If an attorney-general can find a criminal case here; or if a plaintiff’s attorney can find a civil damages case here; then some serious fun could be had. On the criminal side, maybe the theory is: public funds are being spent in an uncontrolled fashion. Any time or other resources used by a grantee of US or state science funding, in furtherance of IPCC business (to review the literature, to prepare the chapters, to consult with the IPCC editorial staff, etc and much etc), is a diversion from the purposes of the grant. It is being spent in a process that is not subject to adequate policies and safeguards against corruption. As a result the public’s money is at best wasted on a report so shoddily prepared as to deliver little value; and at worst spent to make taxpayer-funded science a laughingstock. Suppose IPCC were a housing lender information agency, that reviewed and reported on the state of home mortgage financing activity; and suppose it relied on employees of US banks to help collect and review the data and prepare its reports; and suppose IPCC failed its own (limited) quality controls by using data with errors and falsehoods, sometimes supplied by market manipulators; and suppose the results of those (numerous, chronic, material) failures by IPCC allowed the US banks to expand their book of business and pay their managers bigger bonuses; and suppose this book of business turned out to be…junk. How long do you think it would take prosecutors or plaintiffs to go after the US banks for having been complicit in this (very convenient) arrangement, with IPCC laundering the poor and sometimes fraudulent information, and with bank employees co-opted into helping it do so?
The analogy is not perfect, but any litigator worth her salt could come up with a theory that would get universities’ attention and, thus, ultimately Pachauri’s as well.
Conflict smoflink… were the IPCC – who’s going to stop us – ha ha hahahahahaha.
Pride goeth before a fall.
Pachuri is probably penning his next soft porn novel… far more interesting to him, then actually ensuring correct scientific process in the IPCC.
oMan says:
June 20, 2011 at 5:24 pm
If they did that – the next TAR would be about 4 pages long, mind you the summary for policy makers would be printable on a postage stamp.
Judith Curry makes a good point at her blog (Climate Etc). Namely: even if IPCC has no COI policy, its people mostly are subject to such policies through other affiliations. IPCC Secretatriat works for UN, which has COI policy. IPCC people who work for WMO are likewise covered by its policy. The many correspondents (editors, reviewers, etc) who do IPCC’s real work, are employed by institutions of higher learning etc which have COI policies. It would be worth a look at some of those policies, and how they might apply to COI by a university employee in connection with his or her work for IPCC. Work that will reflect badly on the employer university if it turns out to be corrupt due to lack of COI.
More angles than first appeared…
The only thing the IPCC must do, is die.
If the IPCC ever had any legitimacy whatsoever – and that is up for debate, it has long since dissipated – surely now it’s time to end this farcical process, the latest episode involving Greenpeace writing the script – no conflicted interests there then?
“Science went out of the window!” I can recall somebody making this assertion, to which I would rejoinder, no scientific method, still less investigation ever occurred under the aegis of the IPCC.
IPCC was never about science, no, not science – just about advocacy, bolstering a false premise. The real victims are the taxpayers of the Western world, particularly: the citizens of the USA and Britain.
I am not interested in making people pay, just interested in bringing a halt to good people paying – ie, sending good money after bad.
End it now.
David L says:
June 21, 2011 at 2:50 am
IPCC can’t do it. They exist solely on conflict of interest. Take that away from them and you’ve taken the teeth
out of the beast.
Exactly, the scientists and environmentalists reason to exist would evaporate without the IPCC. Conflict of interest is the entire reason for the IPCC existence. If it goes away lots of people will lose their jobs.
Galvanize says:
June 21, 2011 at 1:45 am
I`m no longer sure that it is arrogance that drives the likes of Pachauri. Ann Widdecombe seems to have it right:
“How long will it be before the voice of reason prevails over the cynical cowardice of climate-change scientists who are faced with increasing evidence that they have it wrong but are too deeply dependent on huge government spending to admit it?”
=============================================================================
I never thought I’d find myself in agreement with old Widders. Still, there’s a first time for (almost) everything.