It’s Worse Than We Thought
Posted by greg2213 on April 15, 2010
To borrow a line from the Al Gore scamology, but this one refers to the IPCC and the quality of its peer-reviwed research, or lack of same.
The IPCC Working Group 4 (AR4) is the document that lays out all the horrible things that will happen if we don’t make AL Gore rich and hand over the world’s economies to the UN and third world dictators.
It seems that the AR4 gets a failing grade on the “quality” of its research. The report is supported by, among other things, newspaper clippings.
21 of 44 chapters in the United Nations’ Nobel-winning climate bible earned an F on a report card we are releasing today. Forty citizen auditors from 12 countries examined 18,531 sources cited in the report – finding 5,587 to be not peer-reviewed.
Here is the IPCC report card
Yes, the IPCC does have procedures for using non peer-reviewed material. It’s in Appendix A to the Principles Governing IPCC Work, page 14.
So while the IPCC does use many sources its supporters, including the guy on top, Pachauri, claim that all of its findings are peer-reviewed. In fact, pretty much all of the entities supporting the IPCC make claims matching Pachauri’s. Here are some of their quotes.
From here on out they will need to add a few qualifiers to such statements, otherwise we’ll just snicker. Sure, non peer-reviewed material has a place, perhaps even beyond just making the document thicker, but if it’s a fluff piece from the WWF I think I’d think twice about using it.
From that appendix:
Non-peer-reviewed sources will be listed in the reference sections of IPCC Reports. These will be integrated with references for the peer-reviewed sources. These will be integrated with references to the peer reviewed sources stating how the material can be accessed, but will be followed by a statement that they are not published.
Now if the corporate world advertised their products in the same way then they’d be paying some heavy fines. Given that the AGW “mitigation” involves $trillions maybe the fines should be increased appropriately?