These committees one of which was IPCC often produced reports making

These committees one of which was ipcc often produced

This preview shows page 167 - 169 out of 323 pages.

These committees, one of which was IPCC, often produced reports making increasingly bold and confident assertions about future climate impacts, but they invariably included statements admitting deep scientific uncertainty(Weart, 2015). Reports of IPCC, including drafts of the latest Fifth Assessment Report, are replete with examples ofthispattern. It is common for committees seeking consensus reports to include qualifications and admissions of uncertainty and even publish dissenting reports by committee members. This common practice had an unintended result in the climate debate. Politicians, environmental activists, and rent-seeking corporations in the renewable energy industry began to routinely quote IPCC’s alarming claims and predictions shorn of the important qualifying statements expressing deep doubts and reservations. Rather than protestthis mishandling of its work, IPCC encouraged it by producing Summaries for Policymakers that edit away or attempt to hide qualifying statements. IPCC news releases have become more and more alarmist over time until they are indistinguishable from the news releases and newsletters of environmental groups. In fact, many of those IPCC news releases were written or strongly influenced by professional environmental activistswho had effectively taken overthe organization. Some climate scientists spoke outearly and forcefully against this corruption of science (Idso,1982; Landsberg, 1984; Idso, 1989; Singer, 1989; Jastrow, Nierenberg, and Seitz, 1990; Balling, 1992; Michaels, 1992) but their voices were difficult to hear amid a steady drumbeat of doomsday forecastsproduced by environmentalists and their allies in the mainstream media. Perhaps the most conspicuous and consequential example of this practice occurred in 2006 in the form of a movie titled An Inconvenient Truth, produced by former Vice President Al Gore, and Gore’s book with the same title (Gore, 2006). The movie earned Gore a Nobel Peace Prize (shared with IPCC), yet it made so many unsubstantiated claims and over-the-top predictions it was declared “propaganda” by a UK judge and schools there were ordered to give students a study guide identifying and correcting its errors before showing the movie (Dimmock v. Secretary of State for Education and Skills,2007). The principal source cited in Gore’s movie and book, and arguably the reason it was well-received by much of the science community, was IPCC. There is no evidence IPCC ever complained about the misrepresentation of its report in the film or asked for corrections. Despite documentation of the film’s and book’s many flaws (e.g., Lewis, 2007), Gore has never revised the book or even acknowledged the errors. IPCC’s reliability wascrippled[damaged] at birth, mandated
Background image
by the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change(UNFCCC) to define climate change as human-caused climate change and to disregard naturally caused climate change. Since natural climate change is at the very center of the debate over whether human activity is influencing the climate and by how much,
Background image
Image of page 169

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture