|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Oct 14, 2011 11:54:37 GMT 1
 Donna Laframboise's new book The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the World's Top Climate Expertabout the IPCC process is out. It looks like this is going to be a good one: "Blooming brilliant. Devastating" - Matt Ridley, author of The Rational Optimist "...shines a hard light on the rotten heart of the IPCC" - Richard Tol, Professor of the Economics of Climate Change and convening lead author of the IPCC "...you need to read this book. Its implications are far-reaching and the need to begin acting on them is urgent." - Ross McKitrick, Professor of Economics, University of Guelph The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) performs one of the most important jobs in the world. It surveys climate science research and writes a report about what it all means. This report is informally known as the Climate Bible. Cited by governments around the world, the Climate Bible is the reason carbon taxes are being introduced, heating bills are rising, and costly new regulations are being enacted. It is why everyone thinks carbon dioxide emissions are dangerous. Put simply: the entire planet is in a tizzy because of a United Nations report. What most of us don't know is that, rather than being written by a meticulous, upstanding professional in business attire, the Climate Bible is produced by a slapdash, slovenly teenager who has trouble distinguishing right from wrong. This expose, by an investigative journalist, is the product of two years of research. Its conclusion: almost nothing we've been told about the IPCC is true. -------- I have not read it yet. |
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Oct 18, 2011 3:04:55 GMT 1
From Steve McIntyre
The self-indulgent and petulant behavior of leaders in the climate community is one of the first things that impresses outsiders. Donna aptly uses the metaphor of a “spoiled child” to describe IPCC and the climate community. Her introduction starts:
This book is about a spoiled child. Year after year, this child has been admired, flattered, and praised.
There has been no end of self-esteem-building in his life. What there has been little of, though, is honest feedback or constructive criticism.
When we’re young, our parents ensure that we confront our mistakes. When our ball shatters a neighbor’s window we’re required to apologize – and to help pay for a replacement. What happens, though, if a child is insulated from consequences? What if he hears his parents tell the neighbor that because he’s special and precious he hasn’t done anything that wrong by trampling the neighbor’s flower bed?
The answer is obvious. A child who is never corrected is unlikely to develop self-discipline. A child whom everyone says is brilliant feels no need to strive for excellence. Nor does he have much hope of developing what, in this tale, is the most important quality of all: sound judgment.
The child at the center of this book was brought into the world by two United Nations bodies – one focused on the weather, the other on the environment. Called the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – IPCC for short – this child arrived more than 20 years ago.
Donna’s book builds on her own line of issues about IPCC (which are related to, but, in many respects, distinct from issues discussed here [Climate Audit]) – the presence of WWF and Greenpeace sympathizers and fellow travelers as IPCC authors, the use of gray environmentalist literature in IPCC (especially WG2, where activist influence is most pronounced).
Recommended.
|
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Oct 18, 2011 9:58:17 GMT 1
Richard Drake on Climate Audit
Posted Oct 17, 2011
This is a book not for the hardened frequenter of sceptics blogs – though I learned a great deal from it – but for the ordinary person who is bored to tears by the nitty-gritty details on places like Climate Audit – and I sure know some of those! – but would still like to know why some of us think it is eminently reasonable to doubt the IPCC, the eponymous delinquent of the title.
As I read this over the weekend I was thrilled that someone with Donna Lafraboise’s communication skills had taken the time to grapple with this extraordinarily important, multi-faceted area. It’s wonderfully researched and footnoted but what sets it apart is its readability. Wherever possible Donna keeps it light and is never (like many other worthy critics) ponderous. When the facts she uncovers will not allow her to be lighthearted her passion – for truth, for justice, for the myriad of victims of incredibly wasteful emission reduction policies – has the precision of a laser rather than the dumb rage of a bull in a china shop.
You could say therefore that I’m a fan. But that’s not the point. The point is: buy copies of this book for all your confused friends, for colleagues, for family and above all for your MP. More than any other volume I have read this book has the power to transform the climate debate by bringing home to ordinary people why it matters so much.
|
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Oct 18, 2011 10:05:08 GMT 1
In case the nay-sayers think Donna is some bred in the bone conservative she is not. She is a self-employed photographer and journalist. Prior to 2002, Ms. Laframboise wrote news features, weekly columns, and daily editorials for Canadian newspapers and magazines. Between 1993 and 1998, she was a member of the board of directors of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association - serving as a Vice-President from 1998-2001. As a journalist, Ms. Laframboise frequently championed unpopular causes. After Guy Paul Morin was wrongly convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison in 1992, most journalists forgot about him. Ms. Laframboise repeatedly used her weekly column in the Toronto Star to expose the flawed forensic science that led to his conviction. (He was exonerated in 1995 and eventually financially compensated.) The same critical-thinking skills that led Ms. Laframboise to bear witness to the Guy Paul Morin story are at work here. Just because a jury has reached a consensus on someone's guilt or innocence, doesn't mean that consensus is correct. Just because most people believe human activity causes global warming doesn't make it so.... noconsensus.org/about.php |
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Oct 20, 2011 2:58:02 GMT 1
Judith Curry said In terms of the broader audience, I have to say that I hope that this book leads to the discontinuation of the IPCC after the AR5 report (which is already well underway, and is arguably sufficiently tarnished that it is likely to have much less influence than previous reports.) . My personal reaction as a scientist is to be very thankful that I am not involved in the IPCC. I already feel duped by the IPCC (I’ve written about this previously), I am glad that I was not personally used by the IPCC. --------- Bravo! Judith, the professor of Climate Science at Georgia Tech, has made herself thoroughly persona non grata amongst the IPCC dominant clique thanks to her speaking out about IPCC abuses and for her writings about uncertainty. Contrary to the alarmist interpretation of uncertainty this does not mean ploughing ahead regardless using a perverse variant of the precautionary principle, but it means considering the very sparse "facts" available with great circumspection and committing to no policies that cannot be demonstrated to do more good than harm and that would be described as "no regrets" policies, anyway. judithcurry.com/2011/10/19/laframboise-on-the-ipcc/#more-5396 |
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Oct 25, 2011 8:59:57 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Oct 29, 2011 11:53:15 GMT 1
Here is Lindzen’s summary of the IPCC process.
“It uses summaries to misrepresent what scientists say; uses language that means different things to scientists and laymen; exploits public ignorance over quantitative matters; exploits what scientists can agree on while ignoring disagreements to support the global warming agenda; and exaggerates scientific accuracy and certainty and the authority of undistinguished scientists.”
------
"the authority of undistinguished scientists.” Love that!
|
|
