Guest Post by Bob Tisdale
Anthony Watts’s post Meh, same old ‘gloom and doom’ from the IPCC over new climate report at WattsUpWithThat prompted this one. I started to write a comment on that thread that began with, The IPCC is nothing more than a… and I went on from there, trying with some success to limit my word count. But I didn’t post it. I figured it would make for a great topic of discussion all by itself, with everyone adding their own continuation to that preface.
So to start the ball rolling, here’s what I came up with.
The IPCC is nothing more than a report-writing entity:
- that was created by politicians for use by politicians to achieve an political-agenda-driven goal
- that relies on politician-financed climate models that were designed, and continue to operate, with the single-minded intent of showing bad things will happen in the future if we continue to consume fossil fuels.
The IPCC and their reports provide no value to anyone other than the politicians who created that body.
That was a first attempt, pretty much rolled off the keyboard with a few tweaks.
So, if you would, please add your continuation of, The IPCC is nothing more than a…
And if you like, consider adding to another preface, If the politicians were truly interested in helping humanity and the planet…
I’m looking forward to reading what you have to say.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The IPCC is nothing more than living proof the Three Stooges had kids.
With each other.
+1
AAA
Hey, leave the Stooges alone!!!!
Long time lurker, first time poster, but I couldn’t let this one go. The Stooges were entertainers (par excellance) and never hurt anyone. Read up on their life stories. Nobody ever needed a written contract with them, their work was as good as gold. And they brought joy to millions.
+1
Maybe they should have said the Keystone Kops.
At a time when Bugs Bunny and Yosemite Sam were under attack because they showed children too much violence, are you trying to tell me that Moe hitting Curley over the head with a hammer wasn’t as well? In fact, I don’t think children would identify with a cartoon character as fast as they would human adults poking each other in the eyes and hitting each other with weapons. I never considered them “entertainment” and still don’t. the Keystone Cops, on the other hand, were.
The Stooges’ favorite law firm: Dewey, Cheatham, and Howe. Sometimes, you had to think to get the humor.
The IPCC is nothing more than the answer to the politicians scientific illiteracy. Having heard there was a problem the politicians wanted a clear, simplistic assessment of the impacts and probabilities.
The IPCC were the experts who hit the jackpot with providing a simplistic explanation of the problem.
But the IPCC was never asked if the problem was real.
Reminds me of some thing that happened on a project I was working on once. We were each asked how long it would take to fix a particular problem. Management went with the guy who said “one week”, very definitely. He spent three months on it, and then they gave it to me. Did they complain about him? Did they heck. They complained about me, because I couldn’t give them an exact time estimate. Even after I fixed it.
management demands numbers. They do not have to be correct you but have to pretend they are correct even when they are not correct
Illiteracy would indicate that in some fashion they were privously capable on learning.
A literate person would have written “previously” and “of learning”.
The IPCC was only asked by politicians how much money can we and our “friends” make off of this and how much power can we grab with this scam? You have to admit, the IPCC has been very good at achieving those goals.
The IPCC has been “very good at achieving these goals” in the sense of being skilled at applying the equivocation fallacy in reaching false or unproved conclusions from arguments that are perceived to be illogical and misleading by very few people.
“Politicians” is being far too simplistec. Leftist Politicians.
1. A bunch of self-serving shysters bringing the good name of science into disrepute through peddling distorting propaganda on the basis of scientific reports peppered with ifs and buts.
2. A vehicle for the organised transfer of wealth from the USA and Western Europe to India, China and others based on nothing more than a bunch of lying grant-chasers bullshitting GIGO science for the best part of 25 years.
3. A bunch of self-absorbed, overpaid assholes constantly on the look out for the next jolly.
4. An organisation with a share of voice only matched by the North Korean Government and whose preachings and strictures have about as much relevance to reality as those coming out of Pyongyang.
5. A clear manifestation why the lofty goals of the UN’s original intentions have been subverted by tammany hall global politics by third rate scroungers to the detriment of all decent people who hoped for better but have learned to expect nothing.
6. an organisation whose time has past, whose executive must be fired and whose funding streams must be cut off, yesterday.
rtj: I wouldn’t go so far as to say that the IPCC has subverted the UN’s “lofty goals”. After all, the brief given to the IPCC was to find that human activity is causing global warming…er, “climate change”. Or is it just pollution nowadays.
I agree. What troubles me the most however, is that these people are so completely invested in this deception, in terms of their reputations, funding, possibility of tenure, their jobs and their Socialist world view that they will never admit they are wrong. Warming is their religion. I listened to John Coleman today on CNN. He made some good points, doing the best he could do in a hostile environment. CNN then brought out a Warmer, with a smug smile, making condescending comments about Mr. Coleman’s ideas, dismissing him as a denier, and parading out again the phony 97% consensus. The CNN moderator was all smiles.
If I had been him I would have told the warmest, anyone one who does not think the climate is changing is a fool, about a 100% of us skeptics believe it is, since we now have answer that question and has put you stupid 97% consensus to rest and we have a question for you why is it your consensus not 100%, after all I believe it should be 100% of every human should believe that the climate is changing. The real problem that you fools ask the wrong question and to hold up a 97% consensus on that question and when that answer should be 100% you must be a fool. Only a fool would think that the climate can remain the same, because when in the history of the earth did it remain stable? Now I put to rest that the climate is changing which it is, now I will as you the real questions, the real question is not if the climate is changing after all it is! the real questions what the cause, how much will it change and which direction is it going to go and for how long is it going to go that direction! To any intelligent person there should be about 100% consensus that we don’t know the answer to any of those questions. Anybody who think they know are truly fools. Actually we all should be telling the world and all the warmest the above, I think we been trying but maybe we are not blunt enough about it.
It’s “warmist”, Mark. You blew it twice.
Bob, I totally agree that the IPCC is merely a report-writing entity. For far too long, we’ve been led to believe this is a scientific body. But it’s actually just a UN bureaucracy, prone to all the normal excesses and shortcomings.
Some of my own thoughts on the new document appear here: IPCC Links New Report to Sneering Stephen Schneider
The climategate e-mails reveal the late Schneider to be rude, intolerant, and an enemy of free-speech. Unbelievably, the IPCC chose to dedicate this new document to his memory.
Thank you for the link, Donna. I am a big fan of your blog posts and books.
Cheers.
To confirm Donna’s and my understandings that the IPCC is nothing more than a report-writing entity, see the IPCC’s History webpage:
Fancy words for a political entity whose mission is to write reports.
Apropos, no?
Unbelievably. Sadly, all too believable, Donna, in the Alice in Wonderland world of the IPCC.
Oh Donna
Schneider was interviewed years ago I’ll try to find the link. Anyone with a brain cell could see how fragrant he was. Global cooling was his thing
Schneider appears at 6:04, here:
Though it’s worth watching all 3 parts to remind ourselves about how “extreme” the cold was in the late 70’s.
fragrant = flagrant? Duh.
Peddling bovine excrement does leave one fragrant.
The IPCC is a peer review body. As such, it’s job is to synthesise the prevailing scientific literature on climate related topics.
Or we could just rely on bloggers.
Uh, yep, “synthesize”.
@DavidR November 2, 2014 at 2:45 pm”
+++++++++++++++
David: You miss characterize their goal, completely and in your own words, you do not understand their mission! Here it is stated from their own words and a link if you don’t believe what they write:
http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg3/index.php?idp=61
1.4 Global Sustainability and Climate Change Mitigation
Figure 1.6: The global-sustainability perspective.
In Sections 1.2 and 1.3, we examined literature that was motivated primarily by concerns of global cost-effectiveness and global equity respectively. We now turn to a third category of literature, which is motivated largely by considerations of global sustainability. This literature views the climate problem as a component of a larger problem, namely the unsustainable lifestyles and patterns of production and consumption, and explores a broad range of options for moving the world towards a sustainable future (Figure 1.6).
Donna Laframboise has done a great job of exposing that the second to last IPPC 5 year report contained 40% non-peer reviewed material.
I had the illuminating experience of being Steve Schneider’s next-door neighbor in Boulder CO in the late 80s-early 90s, just as he was transitioning from “nuclear winter doom” to “global warming doom”
He was clearly entranced with Carl Sagan’s notoriety over the nuclear winter thing. His obsession with public relations and media coverage was conspicuous.
Ego overcame personality, and his lovely wife Cheryl dumped him in the early 90s. No surprise. Hope the kids came out all right.
If IPCC is attempting to gain stature by invoking Schneider’s name, they have failed on both historical and scientific grounds.
I left the following comment at a discussion of a methodology of finding a root cause at.
http://judithcurry.com/2014/10/23/root-cause-analysis-of-the-modern-warming/ :
Compared to this boring and tedious procedure, I find the IPCC approach refreshingly streamlined and efficient:
Start with point 3 – assemble a body of carefully vetted experts. The declare that an excursion has occurred (satisfying point 1) and select carefully vetted data to support that position (point 2).
Replace points 4 to 8 with declarations and a democratic vote of experts. Not only does it confirm a root cause, but it yields an additional benefit of a confidence level: when 29 out of 30 experts vote that the “global warming” is “catastrophic anthropogenic”, they have reached that conclusion on a 97% confidence level.
Sounds like a question for “Family Feud”. We polled 100 people and received the top 7 responses to:
The IPCC is the political incarnation of ‘begging the question’.
another avenue for the Progressive and liberal “elites” to bend our lives and livelihoods in the direction they, with their “superior wisdom” believe we should be going… no matter what we want, what reality says, and in spite of their actual ignorance.
IPCC AR5 TS.6 was written by folks who didn’t get the memo. TS.6 Key Uncertainties pretty much says they haven’t got a clue about most of it and made up the rest.
The IPCC is nothing more than a Trojan horse seeking a world government by stealth and deception.
You nailed it. That is their goal and writing endless reports is their initial method to achieve it by trying to convince people and politicians to pursue a path of economic suicide through the banning of life-giving fossil fuels. These are NOT mis-guided individuals but are ideologues with an agenda that is in reality anti-capitalism and therefore anti-life. If it looks like a Marxist, acts like a Marxist then you can bet it IS a Marxist.
+1 I’m usually not into conspiracy theories but CAGW makes me a believer. The depth of insincerity and deception exhibited is an eye opener.
A new world order?
There are levels of global cooperation; why jump to the most sci-fi?
Many would like to see a more equitable distribution of the world’s resources. An extra 50p to the world’s poorest has far more impact than to a Westerner.
So many will support the proposed remediation techniques regardless of the science behind it. Without wanting a new Imperium.
I do think you are a conspiracy theorist. And I do think you are wrong because you have no limit on your suspicions. The slippery slope fallacy is a fallacy – some international cooperation will not lead inexorably to a global government
The IPCC is nothing more than a…
…collection of ideologues being ideologues.
Politicians are just hustlers but these people are truly dangerous.
The IPCC is nothing more than a method of transferring power and money into the hands of the UN.
Parasites.
The political success of the Montreal Protocol emboldened the Left to reach for the Holy Grail of environmentalism. Which is Full control and throttling of economies and resource production.
I say political success, because as is becoming clear, the science linking the Antarctic ozone hole and Manmade CFCs is starting to look questionable.
It was instantly discredited when the Hole closed up right away, 20 years before emissions reductions could have taken effect high in the atmosphere.
…an International Political Conspirators Conference.
The thing is the DATA does not support any of the claims they are making. In addition the climate has been very stable for the last 100 years compared to other periods of time.
The best part is going forward global temperatures will be trending down not up which should finally end their nonsense.
I doubt it, Slavatore. That is why they changed the name from AGW to Climate Change to Climate Disruption. They want to be able to blame any changes and any weather event on Climate Change/Climate disruption. They will never admit they are wrong. As Dennis Prager says, “Being on the Left means never having to say you are sorry”.
nothing more than a panel of left-wing propagandists, trying to scare the general populations into relinquishing their wallets, in order to save our planet from alleged boogiemen…. Pathetic!
The IPCC is nothing more than a fifth column against humanity.
Chev,you are correct,but it is not just our wallets that they want.Like all totalitarians,they want everything!
I’ve already said
… is nothing more than a lawyer’s wet dream … hundreds of people who have no clue about their personal liability giving advice which is almost certainly wrong and for which they are personally liable.
Hence my other accolade:
International Panel of Climate Clowns.
Intentional People of Crowd Control
I think politicians and other leaders like vast, nebulous ‘problems’ like human induced climate change so they can look like they’re doing something whilst utterly lacking the vision to make a difference in people’s lives where it counts
The IPCC report is nothing more than a not too subtle variation of the BIG LIE propaganda technique.
If governments really want to do something for the future, they should stop hemorrhaging money into an impractical and exaggerated climate agenda and direct their efforts at economically feasible future energy sources, such as newnuclear, that save carbon resources for our chemical needs long into the future
Apologies.Rushed my edit, but you get the idea.
The IPCC is nothing more than an institutionalized development of the hippie movement.
+1
At least we’re back up to 86 years before the world ends. I was starting to worry.
The IPCC is nothing more than … a bureaucracy that between major reports has to find other ways to get attention and remind everyone they’re still around.
If the politicians were truly interested in helping humanity and the planet … they would shed their “CO2 is a demon gas” mindset and encourage scientists to study “natural variability” instead.
The IPCC is nothing more than a group of self-serving climastrologists.
The IPCC is nothing more than a bunch of people who deny observations.
The IPCC is nothing more than a bunch of people doing whatever it takes to protect the pool of research grants.
Here here… bravo… slight correction to point #2 – “…who deny or do not understand observations.”