IPCC process "motivated by pre-conceived agendas" and "scientifically unsound", sez veteran IPCC author

It is possible, but I think it would be rare for someone of Landsea's experience to allow himself to be walked over. It is ever rarer for someone of Landsea's experience to walk out of a meeting before it even started, because he perceived that he might be overpowered. These guys thrive on debate, argument, and putting their own point of view across in the face of scepticism. It's what they do for a living.

As josh says, it sounds like there is some genuine disagreement over the science of the relationship of hurricanes to AGW.

Sure, but few things give the underling greater pleasure than proving the senior scientist wrong...

Definitely.

Yeah the space station is all about engineering.

josh halpern

^^^^^^^^

That should have read 'science'.

Before the construction of the space station, I was critical of its development for the same reasons. There was far more politics involved than there was engineering. Some time back, I received a questionaire in the mail asking my opinion on the space station (before it was constructed). I replied that I was growing tired of paying taxes to fund ever more piles of new designs, and that if NASA couldn't get something into orbit, I would be in favor of cancelling the program.

Nothing quoted suggests that Trenberth was acting in his capacity as a member of IPCC. 'Shortly after Dr. Trenberth requested that I draft the Atlantic hurricane section for the AR4's Observations chapter, Dr. Trenberth participated in a press conference organized by scientists at Harvard on the topic 'Experts to warn global warming likely to continue spurring more outbreaks of intense hurricane activity' along with other media interviews on the topic. The result of this media interaction was widespread coverage that directly connected the very busy 2004 Atlantic hurricane season as being caused by anthropogenic greenhouse gas warming occurring today. Listening to and reading transcripts of this press conference and media interviews, it is apparent that Dr. Trenberth was being accurately quoted and summarized in such statements and was not being misrepresented in the media. These media sessions have potential to result in a widespread perception that global warming has made recent hurricane activity much more severe.'

The press conference was not under IPCC auspices, it was 'scientists at Harvard'. Trenberth is not described by Landsea in any way as delivering his opinion as the IPCC conclusion, or even as appearing as IPCC's lead author or representative. If he did either of those, he was out of line. But he is entitled to have an academic life outside of IPCC and air his professional opinions, much as Landsea has done here.

Is there some agreement IPCC authors sign that prevents them from expressing an opinion outside of IPCC proceedings? Trenberth is going to have an opinion which is going to appear within the committee's deliberations, whether he voices it externally or not. In fact, I have no doubt you could look through the publications of every single person on the committee and divine precisely what their position is, whether they speak at a forum organized by Harvard scientists or not. Does this hamstring Landsea?

Well that's what happens when you are starved for funds resulting from budget cuts forced through by anti-science, anti-technology, Bible-Thumping Republican dittoheads.

Gases Could Raise Temperatures 19.8 Degrees -Study

Wed Jan 26, 1:07 PM ET

By Patricia Reaney

LONDON (Reuters) - Greenhouse gas emissions could cause global temperatures to rise by up to 19.8 degrees Fahrenheit, according to first results from the world's largest climate modeling experiment.

The top end of the predictions, which range from 3.6 F-19.8 F, is double estimates produced so far and could make the world dramatically different in the future.

'Our experiment shows that increased levels of greenhouse gases could have a much greater impact on climate than previously thought,' said David Stainforth, the project's chief scientist, from Oxford University.

Without significant cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, scientists estimate the Earth's temperature and sea level will rise, leading to increased flooding and drastic climate changes.

The temperature range predicted is based on assumptions of carbon dioxide levels double those found before the Industrial Revolution. Scientists estimate these levels will be reached by the middle of this century if greenhouse gas emissions are not reduced.

'This is really just the beginning of the process to try and understand the uncertainty and predictions of climate change,' Stainforth added.

...

The first results of the continuing experiment are reported in the latest edition of the science journal Nature.

'... it is entirely possible that even current levels of greenhouse gases, if stable and maintained for a long period of time, could lead to dangerous climate change,' Stainforth told reporters.

The Kyoto protocol, the main U.N. scheme to reduce greenhouse gases, aims to cut emissions of carbon dioxide by 5.2 percent below 1990 levels by 2008-12.

'The danger zone is not something we are going to reach in the middle of this century. We are in it now,' said Dr Myles Allen of the Met Office.

Climateprediction.net was conceived more than five years ago and launched in 2003. It is funded by Britain's Natural Environment Research Council.

Nothing of consequence, as usual....

Gases Could Raise Temperatures 19.8 Degrees -Study

Wed Jan 26, 1:07 PM ET

By Patricia Reaney

LONDON (Reuters) - Greenhouse gas emissions could cause global temperatures to rise by up to 19.8 degrees Fahrenheit, according to first results from the world's largest climate modeling experiment.

The top end of the predictions, which range from 3.6 F-19.8 F, is double estimates produced so far and could make the world dramatically different in the future.

'Our experiment shows that increased levels of greenhouse gases could have a much greater impact on climate than previously thought,' said David Stainforth, the project's chief scientist, from Oxford University.

Without significant cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, scientists estimate the Earth's temperature and sea level will rise, leading to increased flooding and drastic climate changes.

The temperature range predicted is based on assumptions of carbon dioxide levels double those found before the Industrial Revolution. Scientists estimate these levels will be reached by the middle of this century if greenhouse gas emissions are not reduced.

'This is really just the beginning of the process to try and understand the uncertainty and predictions of climate change,' Stainforth added.

...

The first results of the continuing experiment are reported in the latest edition of the science journal Nature.

'... it is entirely possible that even current levels of greenhouse gases, if stable and maintained for a long period of time, could lead to dangerous climate change,' Stainforth told reporters.

The Kyoto protocol, the main U.N. scheme to reduce greenhouse gases, aims to cut emissions of carbon dioxide by 5.2 percent below 1990 levels by 2008-12.

'The danger zone is not something we are going to reach in the middle of this century. We are in it now,' said Dr Myles Allen of the Met Office.

Climateprediction.net was conceived more than five years ago and launched in 2003. It is funded by Britain's Natural Environment Research Council.

a ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

VD, aka Scott Nudds, note my marks above. 'Our experiment'. What a load of crap. The Brits involved in this farce didn't run an experiment ... they ran a computer simulation. Such a simulation is a digital fantasy if you can't back it up with some sort of measurement.

It's a sad day when some scientists start thinking that computer simulations are reality, and an even sadder day when there are so many people willing to jump on their bandwagon just because the answer came from a computer.