Wednesday, May 12, 2010

Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate

This is the Policymakers Summary of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), an international coalition of scientists convened to provide an independent examination of the evidence available on the causes and consequences of climate change in the published, peer-reviewed literature – examined without bias and selectivity. It includes many research papers ignored by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), plus additional scientific results that became available after the IPCC deadline of May 2006.

The IPCC is pre-programmed to produce reports to support the hypotheses of anthropogenic warming and the control of greenhouse gases, as envisioned in the Global Climate Treaty. The 1990 IPCC Summary completely ignored satellite data, since they showed no warming. The 1995 IPCC report was notorious for the significant alterations made to the text after it was approved by the scientists – in order to convey the impression of a human influence. The 2001 IPCC report claimed the twentieth century showed ‘unusual warming’ based on the now-discredited hockey-stick graph. The latest IPCC report, published in 2007, completely devaluates the climate contributions from changes in solar activity, which are likely to dominate any human influence.


  1. Sorry David, the NIPCC is total anti-science bullshit. What you have posted here is a propagation of lies and denialism.
    You are clearly not a natural scientist that can discriminate between science and anti-science, have chosen to remain willfully ignorant of the reality of AGW and its potentially catastrophic consequences or are propagating such rubbish for selfish interests. The denial of human caused climate change disruption is an ethical and, indeed, a psychological issue.
    I got to this post of yours via
    I hope it's just a case that you've allowed yourself to be taken in by the denialist machine.

    Kind regards
    Hugh Laue

  2. Spoken as a true Gaian fundamentalist. My paper on this will be available shortly.

    Should you wish contact with reality, I am posting the parts of the 'Terms of Reference' for the IPCC, which shows that it is a policy organ.

  3. So you really believe all the denalist anti-science BS? Sorry David - I've been following climate science closely for 2 years now, including a lot of the original peer reviewed literature. Your political opinions don't interest me. The IPCC is not and never has been a policy organ. It was set up to evaluate the science. No lies please!

  4. I will post a link to someone with direct experience with the IPCC, since you are still in doubt.