Comments on: IPCC: “Fix It or Fold It”

By: Basement Bars

Basement Bars — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 05:08:02 +0000

Yeah right, like the IPCC will ever make things easy.

By: James Smyth

James Smyth — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 18:45:18 +0000

Having been referenced by Judith Curry, this might need attention: McKitrick hides the context

By: Luc Chartrand

Luc Chartrand — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 07:00:21 +0000

McKitrick was on Sun TV spoke about IPCC

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/featured/prime-time/867432237001/climate-cheats/1299740509001

Call it Climategate 2.0: new material has surfaced that show green scientists working to smear the naysayers.

By: Dennis Wingo

Dennis Wingo — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 02:10:16 +0000

Slightly off topic but here is the email regarding the official defensive policy of the CRU relative to Steve M’s FOIA requests. From 2009 so it is pretty recent.

http://di2.nu/foia/foia2011/mail/0490.txt

By: Richard Drake

Richard Drake — Mon, 28 Nov 2011 13:35:12 +0000

The article's Climategate 2.0 - James in more restrained mode than we've sometimes seen him. Ending with FOIA's own stated motivation is dead right.

By: Jack Mclaughlin

Jack Mclaughlin — Mon, 28 Nov 2011 13:08:14 +0000

this is a little off-topic for here but I thought it interesting that in todays Wall Street Journal (Nov. 28) there is an article on the op-ed page by James Delingpole that refers to Mann`s attempt to discredit McIntyre and how the Team tried to manipulate data and stamp out dissenting points of view.

By: EdeF

EdeF — Sun, 27 Nov 2011 23:50:16 +0000

AJ, have you read what Ross has written? His suggestions are more systemic than personal.
Avoiding conflict of interest is standard in almost any other business. Prohibiting
lead authors from wholly re-writting sections and preventing them from reviewing their
own reports seems like common sense.

By: manicbeancounter

manicbeancounter — Sun, 27 Nov 2011 23:33:44 +0000

These recommendations may go part of the way in achieving a more balanced IPCC report, but, in my opinion, they will not go all the way.
First, there are quite a small number of specialists in many areas. Therefore to get the top scientists in the field means people reviewing their own work.
Second, the database of peer-reviewed studies is heavily biased towards the consensus. This is partly due to biases in the peer-review process that makes alternative perspectives difficult to publish(e.g. O’Donnell et al 2010, or Spencer and Braswell 2011), but also due to funding biases.

By: bernie

bernie — Sun, 27 Nov 2011 20:41:12 +0000

Excellent piece by Dr. Spencer.

By: Richard Drake

Richard Drake — Sun, 27 Nov 2011 19:40:15 +0000

Tim Montgomerie did a useful portrait of Hilton in the Telegraph at the end of July, including this amusing introduction:

There are three people who are most responsible for the current direction of the Tory party: Cameron, George Osborne, and Hilton. (It used to be a quartet, but Andy Coulson moved on, for reasons you may have read about.)

Coulson you'll remember brought in his old mucker from the News of the World, Neil Wallis, to help out, before they were both arrested over the hacking scandal. Coulson and Hilton never quite hit it off but were installed in the same office in March 2010 in the run-up to the general election. Coulson's departure in January 2011 also coincided with Michael Gove, the education secretary and very close to the Camerons, getting back his own favourite adviser, Dominic Cummings, whom Coulson had blackballed after the election, much to Gove's outrage. It would be fitting if the disgrace of the man who brought in his friend who helped out UEA in the aftermath of Climategate 1 had brought an increase of power to the other Downing Street adviser so that in the week of Climategate 2 he could give this key signal. Nigel Lawson has been a key influence according to the Mail. It's a good sign in the week that his Global Warming Policy Foundation publised Ross's report.