So not only did the IPCC AR4 WGII egregiously misrepresent the science of disasters and climate change, but when questions were raised about that section by at least one expert reviewer, it simply made up a misleading and false response about my views. Not good.With Climate Science, remember - it's sentence first, then the trial. RTWT. The "science is settled" because the science has been suppressed.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
More "peer review"
So what happens when peer review is ignored?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Wow, they just took Pielke out of it and made up stuff, and eliminated other stuff: "Disasters and Hazards section rewritten" - by insurance company Munich Re. Wonder if anyone at the IPCC is on the Board of that company? Mr. Pachauri?
Not sure if you've seen this bit.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/01/climategate_cru_was_but_the_ti.html
It was news to me.
Bob, I hadn't seen that, but I've posted a number of times on this. I have some posts I'll put up tomorrow on this.
And the American Thinker has been all over this for a while now.
Post a Comment