{"id":579336,"date":"2010-05-26T06:27:08","date_gmt":"2010-05-26T10:27:08","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.prisonplanet.com\/?p=44035"},"modified":"2010-05-26T06:27:08","modified_gmt":"2010-05-26T10:27:08","slug":"pope-catholic-night-follows-day-ipcc-found-telling-pack-of-lies-about-sea-level-rises","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/579336","title":{"rendered":"Pope Catholic; night follows day; IPCC found telling pack of lies about sea level rises"},"content":{"rendered":"

Via Prison Planet.com \u00bb Sci Tech<\/p>\n

James Delingpole
\nLondon Telegraph<\/a>
\nMay 26, 2010<\/p>\n

IPCC lies, cheats, distorts again. Yes, all right, it is a bit of a \u201cdog bites man\u201d or \u201cpizza found to contain mozzarella and tomato resting on dough base\u201d kind of story. But on the day in which Britain\u2019s new Prime Minister announced in the Queen\u2019s speech that one of his government\u2019s main goals is to \u201ccombat climate change\u201d, it\u2019s perhaps just as well to remind ourselves of the kind of junk science and misinformation that is inspiring his green policies. (Hat tip: Barry Woods)<\/p>\n

This one comes from the great Canadian blogger Donna Laframboise<\/a>, who has noticed that the most recent report (2007) by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change liberally cited a scientific paper which wasn\u2019t published until 29 months after the cut off date for submissions.<\/p>\n

\u201cAh what\u2019s 29 months between friends?\u201d you might say. But as Laframbroise rightly observes it strips the process of its integrity.<\/p>\n

\n

If IPCC authors are to accurately describe the scientific literature, an agreed-upon cutoff date is required. If expert reviewers are to comment on the IPCC\u2019s use of that literature, they must be afforded adequate opportunity to examine it.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

More sinister still, though, is the way the IPCC report has twisted the paper \u2013 by one David G Vaughan of the British Antarctic Survey \u2013 for its own ends. Here\u2019s what Vaughan\u2019s paper said about the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS).<\/p>\n

\n

Since most of WAIS is not showing change, it now seems unlikely that complete collapse of WAIS, with the threat of a 5-m rise in sea level, is imminent in the coming few centuries.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Note that phrase \u201cit now seems unlikely\u201d.<\/p>\n

Now see how the IPCC interprets Vaughan\u2019s paper:<\/p>\n

\n

If the Amundsen Sea sector were eventually deglaciated, it would add about 1.5 m to sea level, while the entire West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) would account for about 5 m (Vaughan, 2007).<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Yes, yes, IPCC no doubt it WOULD. But as the report you cite to prove it made pretty explicit: IT AIN\u2019T GOING TO HAPPEN.<\/p>\n

Full article here<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

\"Pope<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

Related Posts:<\/h3>\n