- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 14,185
- Reaction score
- 8,768
- Location
- Houston
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
The IPCC was conceived as a body what would take the best science and formulate policy on the climate. Up until 1990 it did this admirably, but at the IPCC meeting in Sweden a third world revolt, led by Brazil, destroyed that process. The revolt smashed the science to policy process at its very nexus. Within a few months the revolution was complete. In December of that year the IPCC was taken from its UN parent bodies, the Environmental Program (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and put under the command of the General Assembly, where poor countries held an overwhelming majority. The scientific bodies were left out in the cold. From that point on poor countries tried again and again to use climate change as a pretext for warming mitigation – an increase in transfers of money from rich to poor countries.
Whereas prior to this the scientific bodies had said that the prediction of warming from increased CO2 was theoretical speculation that needed empirical confirmation, now the IPCC came under tremendous pressure to state unequivocally that CO2 was the cause of warming and that mitigation was essential, things that the science did not support. Most of the scientists with the IPCC wanted to get it right. They all remembered the ice age scare of the ‘70s, and they didn’t want a repeat of that sort of thing. But the politics won out. James Hansen about this time had testified before Congress that greenhouse warming was definitely occurring. Other scientists regarded him as a grandstanding extremist. The IPCC report at that time confirmed this view. But this greatly intensified the political pressure for the IPCC to come to some definite conclusions. The political side of the IPCC, seeing the growing enthusiasm for AGW, pushed forward without waiting for the science to confirm their policies. The Framework Convention on Climate Change opened with a statement that emissions “will result in” global warming. There seemed to be no need for the scientists to continue their search for empirical confirmation. The FCCC then redefined “climate change” as only that occurring from human activity. The only use the body had for the science after that was to confirm policy preconceptions. Nevertheless, up until the mid ‘90s the First Working Group of the IPCC held firm in its conclusion that it didn’t know if AGW was happening, didn’t know when it could be detected, and didn’t know when dangerous levels of CO2 might be reached. That’s when the political people settled the question for the scientists, re-writing their report to say that anthropogenic global warming had been detected. Protests of this action were bowled over with a huge wave of climate sanctimony. Scientist failing to toe the line were from that point on marginalized, unsupported by their academies. Skepticism became intolerable, silence of dissent golden. This corruption took over the whole field of climate science. Huge political forces overwhelmed scientific principles and processes and empowered those scientists willing to participate in the corruption.
Paraphrased from “The Scientists and the Apocalypse” by Bernie Lewin in “Climate Change: The Facts” edited by Alan Moran
Whereas prior to this the scientific bodies had said that the prediction of warming from increased CO2 was theoretical speculation that needed empirical confirmation, now the IPCC came under tremendous pressure to state unequivocally that CO2 was the cause of warming and that mitigation was essential, things that the science did not support. Most of the scientists with the IPCC wanted to get it right. They all remembered the ice age scare of the ‘70s, and they didn’t want a repeat of that sort of thing. But the politics won out. James Hansen about this time had testified before Congress that greenhouse warming was definitely occurring. Other scientists regarded him as a grandstanding extremist. The IPCC report at that time confirmed this view. But this greatly intensified the political pressure for the IPCC to come to some definite conclusions. The political side of the IPCC, seeing the growing enthusiasm for AGW, pushed forward without waiting for the science to confirm their policies. The Framework Convention on Climate Change opened with a statement that emissions “will result in” global warming. There seemed to be no need for the scientists to continue their search for empirical confirmation. The FCCC then redefined “climate change” as only that occurring from human activity. The only use the body had for the science after that was to confirm policy preconceptions. Nevertheless, up until the mid ‘90s the First Working Group of the IPCC held firm in its conclusion that it didn’t know if AGW was happening, didn’t know when it could be detected, and didn’t know when dangerous levels of CO2 might be reached. That’s when the political people settled the question for the scientists, re-writing their report to say that anthropogenic global warming had been detected. Protests of this action were bowled over with a huge wave of climate sanctimony. Scientist failing to toe the line were from that point on marginalized, unsupported by their academies. Skepticism became intolerable, silence of dissent golden. This corruption took over the whole field of climate science. Huge political forces overwhelmed scientific principles and processes and empowered those scientists willing to participate in the corruption.
Paraphrased from “The Scientists and the Apocalypse” by Bernie Lewin in “Climate Change: The Facts” edited by Alan Moran
