Yes, you can register to be a reviewer. No “climate science” degree required. That certainly qualifies Dr. Michael Mann.
The Expert Review of the First Order Draft Draft of the Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report will run from 29 Apr 2019 to 23 Jun 2019. Registration will be open until 2019-06-15 23:59 (CST).
This is interesting:
Self Declaration of Expertise
I declare that I have scientific, technical or socioeconomic expertise in one or more areas relevant to the report and am therefore qualified to serve as an Expert Reviewer on the chapter(s) indicated.
My advice, go for it, follow the link:
https://apps.ipcc.ch/comments/ar6wg1/fod/register.php
I told them that I had 19 “Participation Trophies” hanging on my wall….( I kinda, sorta failed to mention that they weren’t mine ( but the wall is )), no way they can turn me down… : )
I submitted as a retired public school science teacher with a MS in Ecology. Will be interesting if selected. Thanks for the heads up.
I am now a reviewer and looking at the report.
I applied. I was the President of an Astronomy Club for 2 years, and member for over 30. I also wrote several articles for our newsletter, a couple of which vaguely resemble poorly written science papers. They’ll either LOL or send a private plane to pick me up and make me Director of the IPCC.
I would urge some caution to anyone thinking of this. We all know given that the science is on the sceptical side, that sooner or later this scam will hit the rocks and the law suits will start flying. And who will they sue? The obvious target are the “expert reviewers” of the IPCC … irrespective of whether they were personally for or against the final outcome, by participating they become part of the “association” and legally liable.
So I wouldn’t put myself forward to be culpable in this many unless I had professional indemnity insurance covering the several $trillion that the IPCC is liable for.
But no insurance company will ever indemnify anyone for such an eye-watering amount …. so you’d have to be pretty stupid to get involved with the IPCC process.
No problem, Mike H,
I’m judgement proof.
Mann has a Nobel Prize don’f forget
Thanks Anthony for the info. I have applied to be a reviewer of relevant chapters on physics/chemistry issues. Dr, JBVigo
After reviewing my application, the IPCC wrote me that it seemed my background would be more relevant for reviewing WGIII, rather than WGI. Ya, sure. WGI decides if the world is ending, WGII and WGIII decide on which hand-basket we will be using.
It would useless to register if you are a skeptic. As soon as you point to something that goes against the core teachings of Al Gore’s Church of Climatology, it will be ignored.
Mosher should be in there then.
I signed up for those chapters in my area of expertise, and I’m genuinely interested in being a reviewer. Thanks for this link, Anthony!
I got an actual reply. They want me to clarify how my expertise relates to the substance of of the IPCC report. Perhaps I’ll tell them I studied climate change at the Bloom County Polytechnic Institute, under the tutelage of the immenent Professor Bill the Cat.
I got a pretty quick approval. I do however have a relevant education and work for a UN organisation that generally cheers them along.
Hi packerpack – thanks for the comments.
I’ve been accepted to review the section on the energy balance, feedback and sensitivity. Not that I expect they’ll pay attention, but when the lawsuit eventually occurs, there will be evidence that they knew about the many fatal errors in their reports.
Hunting offers benefits to the hunter as well.
To my amazement my PhD in Electrical Engineering, along with a couple of publications related to my specialty, enabled me to be a reviewer. Not what I expected.