Comments on: Will Stocker Retaliate against the U.S?

By: The dog that did not bark | Digging in the Clay

The dog that did not bark | Digging in the Clay — Sun, 05 May 2013 13:21:37 +0000

[...] they tend to “Lawyer Up”. For example, Thomas F. Stocker one of the researchers is fighting Steve McIntyre’s efforts to gain access to the deliberations the IPCC’s “Climate Scientists” (Working [...]

By: Ed Barbar

Ed Barbar — Tue, 09 Oct 2012 12:39:48 +0000

The letter would be funny, if only the topic weren’t so serious!

I can imagine a response something of the effect to “We can’t answer your question because it might influence our working relations with these governments.”

By: RomanM

RomanM — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 17:52:43 +0000

Try here with a discussion here.

By: HaroldW

HaroldW — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 17:52:32 +0000

Werner Furrer -
The letter is available at
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/letter_wg1ar4authors_26022010-1.pdf

By: Werner Furrer

Werner Furrer — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 17:06:23 +0000

Would it be possible, to send me a copy of the whole letter of Thomas Stocker?

Thank you
Kind regards
Werner

By: Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup | Watts Up With That?

Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup | Watts Up With That? — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 00:05:35 +0000

[...] http://climateaudit.org/2012/10/04/will-stocker-retaliate/ [...]

By: Kenneth Fritsch

Kenneth Fritsch — Sat, 06 Oct 2012 17:52:35 +0000

“The context of the full statement supports such a reading, whatever the truth may be.”

The context is AR5 which is a continuation of the previous ARs including AR4. Does the author(s) know what the Ar5 will say about the robustness of AR4 or AR3 or Ar2 or AR1. Do the conclusions and the robustness of previous IPCC reviews stand for all time, or like science is supposed to work, continue to progress and change. I can understand a comment and position coming out of those who defend political actions and tend not to admit past errors or need for change.

By: David

David — Sat, 06 Oct 2012 14:48:38 +0000

“In addition a number of governments are considering beginning their own investigations or asking IPCC to conduct a review.”

Is it possible to FOI this information to see exactly what said nations concerns were, and how the IPCC responded?

I think it was nations conducting their “own” investigation, that scared the hell out of the IPCC. I think they buried the letter to hide this communication.

By: cgh

cgh — Sat, 06 Oct 2012 10:43:47 +0000

Harold, Skiphil, there’s another aspect of this which is even more disturbing now that I think about it. As Steve pointed out in his intro, this is directed to members of Canadian, US and Australian government agencies (among others). What we have here then is a letter advising these government bureaucrats not to tell their superiors anything but to redirect questions from superiors to the WG1 co-chairs. This isn’t sedition, but it’s running close to the line.

Skiphil, you are right. It calls into question the supposed independence of scientists on government payroll.

By: barry

barry — Sat, 06 Oct 2012 05:32:46 +0000

Is there any reason why the newly available “secret letter,” or a link to it has not been posted on the two climateaudit articles about the issue?