“All written expert, and government review comments will be made available to reviewers on request during the review process and will be retained in an open archive in a location determined by the IPCC Secretariat on completion of the Report for a period of at least five years.”
Despite this, IPCC Review Editor John Mitchell of the UK Met Office claimed to have destroyed all their working documents and correspondence pertaining to his duties as Review Editor and the Met Office also claims to have expunged all records.
Three primary lessons here:
#1 Kyoto comes with no warranty, documents.
#2 Kyoto is indefenceable.
#3 Kyoto was a huge Hoax.
Life’s lesson here ?
Be Hoax Aware.
Here is an idea. Require both sides of this debate to put some money in an account for when this does get settled. The side that is right gets to keep the money. I doubt the climate change evangelist will be so sure of their position then.
Sounds like the Michael Bellesiles defense style.
I’d have to agree that the initial request seemed a bit broad, and thus practically unmanageable. His case would be stronger had he targeted specific correspondence, time frame or persons.
That being said, the idea that scientific/technical correspondence pertaining to review of the IPCC reports is being destroyed has to raise a huge red flag as to what is actually going on at the organization and what the agenda may actually be.
Something just occurred to me (yeah I’m really slow). Recently the IPCC has admitted that the earth’s temperature has been dropping since 1998. Yet the warmongerers continue to use every weather anomaly since then, as a sign of extreme weather caused by AGW., Well, since the earth has been cooling during this period, then the logical conclusion must be that it is the cooling of the earth that is causing these anomalies (or as they say “extreme weather”). Global warming = good, Cooling (brrrr)= bad.
DrD, most information requests to government agencies are typically broad. There is no index of documents, so individuals or organizations typically request all documents related to a particular topic. Typically the only basis on which a document can be withheld is that it is classified or proprietary. There will be large variations between Canadian, British and US practice, but those are the general distinctions. Consequently, I’m not particularly surprised at the extent of the request, nor is it particularly onerous for the department concerned. Remember, a principal function of any bureaucracy is document control.
Hi Kate,
Here is something you may want to discuss – the Liberal Party is potentially in huge legal trouble as a result of their use of the term green shift.
http://splatto.net/blog/?p=852
If links are removed just click my name and you will be redirected to my blog, it’s the topmost article.
i believe this is standard practice when hq is in danger of falling. or perhaps admin budgets were eaten by airline tickets. or maybe they thought the whole scheme was a slam dunk and they wouldn’t need the documentation for reference?
who knows? maybe there was just so much bullshit that the place began to smell and it was the only option. oh well, they can always get back to the task of transforming base metals into gold.
Matt’s issue is worth highlighting….too funny. Was Cherniak in charge of the url search?
Re the main story. Of course there is no documentation. When soething like AGW is proven through Aristotelian science then rhetoric is all that is required not proof.
what can one say?
I don’t know what the bigger hoax is, Barack Hussein Obama or Kyoto.
I’d say it’s probably Hussein Obama but Kyoto is a close second.
The problem here is that they have nothing. The entire effort to sell on paying for the air we breathe is a hoax. It is an out right attack on the capitalist west.
You may have noted that they are not coming down too hard on communist/capitalist China.
Nor on the capitalist slave camps of India.
[quote]You may have noted that they are not coming down too hard on communist/capitalist China.[/quote]
Just the other night GORE was speaking at an Obama event. He did a hatchet job on China’s goods & export … everything short of declaring a nuclear WAR..
He really is an IDIOT … Gore won’t be flying in China’s air space anytime soon… and Obama was at Gore’s side.. bada bing.
BTW: Shredding usually occurs when the FED’s are sniffing around… after first contact…
Lord Black Knows..
Wonder if this guy is a Michael Mann (aka Mr Hockey Stick) sycophant!!
Not releasing data or destroying data…hmmm which is more scientifically fraudulent??
I am sure it really was just an accident, and no data that could possbily be used to show bias was actually destroyed.
In fact, I bet it was data that proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that AGW is real that was destroyed!!! Hmmm, maybe not!
In response to Dr.D, here is how the IPCC defines its role on its own web site:
The role of the IPCC is to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation. – IPCC Home page
http://www.ipcc.ch/about/about.htm
The only cause of climate change that interests them is human. They are not interested in other possible causes. That explains why so much nonsense gushes from that outfit.
Anything that the UN does or produces is tainted.
The time for this farce to end has arrived so let’s get it over with. I want my government to stop funding the UN!
I propose the following hypothesis:
THERE WAS NO IPCC EVIDENCE TO DESTROY. Kyoto is analogous to town movie sets in the old spaghetti westerns – a total facade. In other words: made up from the beginning.
Works of fiction don’t require superfluous things such as meteorology research notes, raw data review documents, software design basis memorandums, detailed peer reviews of the weather simulation software, data comparisons from initial to “tuned” simulations, etc. If the research was just a “Nature of Things” dramatic soundbite complete with shots of photo-shop darkened billowing smokestacks, who needs hard research. Just do what it takes to get the money.
What we have here is the Lefty Wingnut version of the 1978 movie with the pretend moon landing: KYOTOCORN ONE.
[quote]THERE WAS NO IPCC EVIDENCE TO DESTROY. Kyoto is analogous to town movie sets in the old spaghetti westerns – a total facade. In other words: made up from the beginning.[/quote]
Martin B,
I think you got it. The IPCC documentation was most likely written “before” the scientific review facade. No science done at IPCC
That’s why the focus on controlling Co2… 1960’s… It was a fraudulent cure looking for a deserving disease.. and AGW was invented.