IPCC credible?? I think not.

So the government hacks wrote the summary for policy makers that was supposed to be for theirownselves–ain’t control an addicting thing?

Harvard professor Stavins, big shot with the IPCC tells UK paper The mail that the exec summary for policy makers of the IPCC report was written/edited by, not for the gov officials.

He says the government bureaucrat/policy makers/mandarins/apparatchiks deleted large segments of the proposed summary for policy makers because they would interfere with the effort to redo and revisit and revise and resurrect the Kyoto Treaty, no less. I am shocked to hear such a thing might happen.

Check out this report–Money can buy you love–just ask the Gov and the prostitutes they consort with. The revised new comprehensive and socialistic redistributionist Kyoto Treaty was the goal, and science should not get in the way.

How many of the many so-called scientists have been compromised like this–pressure to provide the “science” to support the policy and regulatory proposals of the people with the bucks?

Remember that 20 billion from the US Gov is going annually to the climate crusade, and then there’s UN money and NGO money.

I am surprised they don’t just hire goons to come and harass me and my family. It would be cheaper–more dangerous but less expensive than hiring trolls for the internet and scientists as shills.

Imagine their frustration that the warmers opposition is holding the line pretty well, our poorly funded effort to stop greenie insanity is frustrating them no end, and at this point we are causing them much heartburn. Recall cap-and-trade and many other big projects are in the dustbin. Kyoto got a no from the Senate and will again.


5 responses to “IPCC credible?? I think not.

  1. There are types of cancer that develop in a similar way. Cells send growth signals to themselves.

  2. The problem with having a tiger by the tale is that you are only the one in charge while you can hold on.
    The Tiger is getting pretty testy.

  3. Didn’t Donna Laframboise expose this same activity in the prior IPCC Report? Her book, “A Teenage Delinquent that Became a Climate Expert” (this is paraphrased), exposed the whole writing process, which according to the paragraphs above suggest this process continued.

  4. It is even worse than that. Going back at least as far as the second report, I think, the summary is released before the main report, and the main report is required to be compatible with the summary.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s