Dutch advice to IPCC: limiting the scope to human induced climate change is undesirable
Governments around the world have been asked by IPCC to think about the future of the IPCC. The Netherlands now sent their submission to the IPCC and made it available on the website of KNMI.
I would say Holland is fairly critical about how IPCC is operating right now. This part struck me as most interesting:
The IPCC needs to adjust its principles. We believe that limiting the scope of the IPCC to human induced climate change is undesirable, especially because natural climate change is a crucial part of the total understanding of the climate system, including human-induced climate change. The Netherlands is also of the opinion that the word ‘comprehensive’ may have to be deleted, because producing comprehensive assessments becomes virtually impossible with the ever expanding body of knowledge and IPCC may be more relevant by producing more special reports on topics that are new and controversial.
I agree with both points. The (almost) obsession of IPCC with greenhouse forcing has greatly limited progress in climate science in my opinion, so I am glad my government now raises this point. And in my (Dutch) book De Staat van het Klimaat I concluded that IPCC in AR4 had not succeeded to come up with a “comprehensive” report. I also agree IPCC should pay much more attention to controversial topics. The treatment of controversial topics in AR4 and also AR5 was and is unsatisfactory for two reasons: there is not enough space reserved to go into the necessary details and the author teams are almost always biased in favor of the consensus view and therefore not giving enough credit to minority views.
The Netherlands also want to make an end to the huge volumes IPCC is producing and replace it by shorter web based (special) reports:
More here:
http://www.staatvanhetklimaat.nl/2013/07/05/dutch-advise-to-ipcc-limiting-the-scope-to-human-induced-climate-change-is-undesirable/
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Venter says:
July 8, 2013 at 9:45 am
A lot of us understood what he said well enough.
Well, I didn’t. And Marcel concurs that he could have been more precise.
And my criticism still stands:
“So paying attention to the “smaller” controversial topics is important and IPCC should do it in a balanced way. A problem with that is that there a gazillions of “smaller” controversies and I don’t see any way of selecting which ones to pay attention to that will not upset someone. IPCC in the draft of AR5 did comment [and reject] the cosmic ray-climate controversy. How many more would you think the IPCC should pay attention to [and reject – as they by definition must, considering their agenda]? Perhaps you could make a list of recommended controversies for the IPCC to consider? And post it here.”
Perhaps you could make such a list and show us?
Apologies for the misspelling Leif, just shows I should check before typing. In English, Leif is generally pronounced Leef in my experience, and I without thinking turned the sound into letters.
Out of curiousity, what is the correct pronunciation? Swedish seems to be Layf and Norwegian Life. If I get the correct sound in my head then I won’t be likely to repeat the misspelling.
MikeP says:
July 8, 2013 at 11:41 am
Apologies for the misspelling Leif
As I explained to ‘Venter’ [whomever he is] such misspellings are common and shouldn’t upset anybody.
Out of curiousity, what is the correct pronunciation?
Since I’m of Danish roots it would Laif, where the ‘ai’ is pronounced as ‘ei’ in ‘either’ by English speaking people [and in New England] and as the ‘i’ in Life and Light.
Marcel concurs that he could have been more precise because he’s a gentleman and understands that not everybody gets what he meant and people whose first language is not english could have problems. However you made a song and dance out of it and literally hijacked this thread over that, lecturing like a schoolmaster who expects strict obedience from his kids.
And when the boot is on the other foot with respect to your misspelling his name, you did not hav the courtesy to say a simple sorry, especially when you spelt his name as ” crock ” instead of Crok. You go to lengths explaining your name to all and sundry and did not have the courtesy to check what crock means.
So when you make a mistake you ” such mistakes are common and should not be taken seriously “. However if you perceive someone’s post is not clear to you, it becomes a huge issue for you.
That is hypocritic. But yes, true to form for you.
Venter says:
July 8, 2013 at 9:49 pm
check what crock means
crock: An earthenware pot or jar.
Venter says:
July 8, 2013 at 9:49 pm
Marcel concurs that he could have been more precise because he’s a gentleman and understands that not everybody gets what he meant and people whose first language is not english could have problems.
‘english’ should be English, and Crok’s first language is Dutch, which could indeed be a problem. Furthermore, as Marcel concedes, he did not say what he meant or meant what he said, so some clarification [finally] was indeed welcome, but you need to wash your mouth out with soap.
It’s ironic about you talking about others needing to wash mouths with soap, considering the way you have been posting here. Physician, heal thyself. And Crock has many meanings, if you’d cared to do your homework
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/crock
I don’t see you conceding your mistake with his name and you only keep finding excuses to justify.
Venter says:
July 9, 2013 at 1:21 am
And Crock has many meanings, if you’d cared to do your homework
Those other meanings are slang, not to be used by gentlemen, and it is fitting that you should think of those.
I don’t see you conceding your mistake with his name and you only keep finding excuses to justify.
No justification is needed for simple mistakes.
Leif, thank you for the information. Maybe someday I’ll be lucky enough to meet you in person and try it out 🙂
When a gentleman makes a blooper about spelling somebody’s name and is pointed out the the person whose name was mis-spelt, he says sorry and gets along with it. He doesn’t make a lot of excuses to justify his error. So don’t confuse yourself with a genlteman.
Typo, last world should be ” gentleman ” in my previous post.
Venter says:
July 9, 2013 at 9:52 pm
He doesn’t make a lot of excuses to justify his error.
I make no excuses whatsoever, just say that mistakes happen. As they clearly were unintentional, no apology is required and none is offered. Now, you could apologize for wasting bandwidth on this.