Slide 1

Slide 2

ipcc INTfRGOVERNMEIHAl PA.Nfl ON Cfiffiate Ch3ß~e

Almost nothing you've heard about the UN climate panel is true

Europear~tostitut or ("> !I e & L nergy n;of~ l·" Ap :Z011tf M.anmiel"n

Good morning. I am a Canadian journalist and the author of two books about the IPCC.

When I began researching climate change 5 yrs ago, I had never heard of this United Nations body that's in charge of writing "the Climate Bible."

I had no idea that govts all around the world were telling their citizens that the reason we should believe there's a climate crisis is because the IPCC says so.

I had no idea that new laws, new taxes, and massive changes to energy systems were all being justified by pointing to the work of this particular organization­the great IPCC.

This is my first book about the IPCC. A German translation has been published by EIKE, and I believe there are copies here, today.

ln this book, I explain that many of the things we've been told about the IPCC are not, in fact, true.

Let's start with the claim that it is a collection of the world's top scientists and best experts.

Slide 3

Slide4

Slide 5

"These are people who have been chosen on the basis of thcir track record, on their record of publications, on the research that they havc done._ They are people

who are at the top of their profession. .. "

Rajendro Pachauri IPCC eh airman

]une2007

graduate student IPCC authors

Bonwer -IPCC Iead author in - '! ' -eamed Masters in 2001 and PhD in 2010

Sari Kovats -in 19'J~. was one ofonly 21 people chosen to about climate change & human health -first academic paper published in 1997 -received her PhD in 2010 - 16 years after becoming involved with the IPCC

"we cany out an assessment of climate change based on peer· ~ ; tw-e, so everything that we look at and take lnto account in our assessments has to carry [the] credibility of peer-reviewed publlcations, we don'tsettle for anythh~ .. ~· s .I . tbat.•

IPCC chalrman Pachauri testim019' to o commfttee ofthe North Carollna legislature Feb.2008

Rajendra Pachauri has been the chairman of the IPCC for 14 years.

When journalists ask him who writes IPCC reports, this is the sort ofthing he says:

[read aloud]

But I discovered something rather different. Some of the key people at the IPCC -Iead authors and the heads of chapters- have, in fact, been mere graduate students. Students who were a decade or more away from earning their PhD.

[discussion of text on screen]

These are not people at the top of their profession. They arenot even close to being leading scientists.

Here's chairman Pachauri, again. ln 2008, he addressed a committee of the North Carolina state legislature. Here's what he told those lawmakers:

[read quote]

As it turns out, that's nonsense, too.

Slide 6

Slide 7

18,soo documents listed as source material by the

IPCC's 2007 report

18,soo documents listed as source material by the

IPCC's 2007 report

s,6oowere peer-reviewed

30%

A few years ago (2010), I asked readers of my blog for help. 40 volunteers from 12 countries helped me examine the references listed at the end of each of the 44 chapters in the IPCC's 2007 report.

We sorted these references into 2 categories: articles published in peer-reviewed academic journals and everything else.

The results were shocking:

5,600 documents listed by the IPCC source material had NOT been published in peer-reviewed journals.

30%

Slide 8

Slide9

.. we carry out an assessment of climate change based on peer·reviewed literature, so everyd:dng that we Iook at ~' account in our assessments has to carry [the] credlbUlty of peer­reviewed publications, we don't .ld- for anytb • that:

IPCC chairman Pachauri testimony to a committee ofthe North Carolina legislature Feb.2008

.\JIO.H'>or11ot~..._ GI:teln'lb'tn.ll.andS•~mM I-...rl~ .. ~t..-Qdllp~

Now it may be that some of those sources were legitimate. lt may have madesense for the IPCC to rely on them .

Butthat doesn't change the fact that the IPCC's chairman has made profoundly untrue statements. For years, he insisted that everything the IPCC considers had been subjected to academic peer­review beforehand- and that IPCC reports were credible for that reason.

He is the one who declared that the IPCC doesn't settle for anything less.

Now that we know that 30% of its source material was not peer-reviewed, what are we supposed to think?

ln that same 2007 report, the IPCC chose to rely on a document produced by an activist group called the World Wildlife Fund (WWF).

lt claimed that Himalayan glaciers were in danger of disappearing by the year 2035. The IPCC took the WWF's word for it and published this claim in its own report.

Slide 10

Slide 11

Slide 12

CN r limatt• t'·hief admits mistakf' on Himalo1yan gl:l(•it<rs warn i n~

~:.:·.::;:.-::~= .. :~:.~:,~ ·::. ~=~=~;:"'-i~ ....... -.... --·-.·---=:=--~IN,.._" .. ;:: r....~--- .. -.-n ..... _ ~- ... -·_ .. "....~-· ... ·--... I». ___ .. _", ... _ ... ,.,.~-

-~=---7--~ _ ...... .-:!:::~==-~::::;.:....-·-":::;:."'-_ ... _______ ...., ..... .,

c--·--~-~·- ,_ __ ---:..~<· c_..._ .. -. • .._ ...... ,_ ... ···-~- .. , ....... ·- _,,.. .. y ....... ~ ......

;::~~~~-=-·-\··-~--,."-_..___.._{_ ... ~~~=-===.::;:--~:..::--.. .:.;::.:.: .. -:·=:::. ·-·r.._ .... ......_. __ ..,"_,.._ __ , ____ :. ........ --.. ~--.-- ..... ....-oc----:

!:::::.:..7..!-=.::::·~=-~"'!.~:::-::~-!·~::-~~ ==Ä.t~-===-,!;~7:---=.::::~~ -,...,..,.._-.-._. .. ___ ..... ..__ ... ____ .. -~._ .. "" -~,,...,,~ .", _____ ""'" ·el(o l'>o--.....,_ ... ......., ......... ,.,.,....__4

-~·~-~--,·!· -.... ,. ~ ...... ._.....,_, .. _",_ ... _____ ,..~----'"' ··--

~--..... -.h .... ..-~.t: ... ~ .... _ ___,1.-".....,_,_ _ _ _,_,_ ...... _ .. _~""""- '·---·"r-·· .. --.. ..,.o;_ ... .._ __ ... ,.... ...... : .... ,~~( _ ... ~~ ..... ...._. _ .. ____ ............. ·-~ ... --"'_._ ......... ". ___ ... ------~_.... .. ~ .. "' ... _ .... __ ._'"-" looooo:•-'---.... , ... ..-........... "~--->0;~ ....... - ..... -...,... ....... .._.. ___ .. _; __ ,\ ............ _ ... _ ---l--~~--,_"_~~"-----· - .. - .. --··-::::::::~:;:: . .:.:::.'!::·:::::'.:..~:-=.::,::-~:-:.--::-~~!':'~~~~~~.!~.:-'!;_-;;---...

Later, it admitted that this glacier prediction was wrong - embarrassingly wrong.

So what did the IPCC learn from that experience? Did it conclude that it's a bad idea to rely on information produced by activist groups?

Did it forbid its personne I from citing activist Iit erature as evidence?

l'm afraid not. Here are Chapters 2 and 4, from the Working Group 2 section of the brand new IPCC report.

These chapters were released mere days ago.

This is page 25 of Chapter 2. The sole evidence the IPCC cites for a claim about Arctic ecosystems is a 2012 document authored by Christie and Sommerkorn.

Slide 13

.., __________ .. _ ... _q_.,._.. --~--_ .... , ..... _______ ... __ .. __ _ .. , .. ___ ._ ....... _ ........ _,.,. __ ._ .. _--· .. -~ .... __ .. _ ...... _,,. ~ ··---.... --..,._~l~--- ........... _ .. _ ....... .. _______ .. ____ .. _____ ..... _ _ _. ..... _ .. _ ..... _v_ .. _~--------- ........... -.. ~---". .............. -" ... ' - .. -_ .. _________ .. __ .. -·---,~- -· -..... _ .. _____ _ .-...~--·--........ ·---.. ._ ..... ___ _

i!fl!! ... -------·-·-~ -··---·· -~·~ ...... --.............. ~ ............. ('>.' ............. ___ ,.. --........... .-. ______ .... _ _..._ ... _

.•. .. -------

Slide 14

~----------------------~

Slide 15

This is page 58 from Chapter 4. Once again, the IPCC's only evidence for a statement about the Arctic is Christie and Sommerkorn.

But "Christie and Sommerkorn" is not peer-reviewed science, published in a reputable academic journal.

lt's a report written by an activist group- the same group responsible for the Himalayan glacier mistake.

The WWF raises hundreds of millions of Euros every year by declaring that the sky-is-falling. We're on the brink of ecological collapse- send money now.

Why does the IPCC continue to take the WWF's word for it? Why does it not have a policy forbidding its personnet from relying on this kind of material?

Many versions of this graphic can be found on the Internet. Ordinary people, in the real world, learn from their mistakes. They take steps to ensure it won't happen again.

The IPCC made a choice. Today, in 2014, it still chooses to treat activist publications as reliable evidence.

Why?

Slide 16

Slide 17

Slide 18

1.-....-<looe ..... ..,~ .... --....~.,..". l."'«z.•v~4*"'fOK--ftt>"­l.l<>--·ol~dou-"-· ~·-- .. .,--~ .... ... ,..._ ........ ,.. .. - • • _,.~---·~ l'"~ ,., ....,. __ '*""~--"'""'""-··_..,..,-, .............. _,.",.. .. -~ ~ 1-.a<idoo:-

self-delusion noun fC or Ul UK• us• t,self. dl'k1:.3~

. IDeM:10fAIIclWIIgyotit'SIIfl»beleYe$0fnethlnfttlatlsno!:tnll:

~~-fi'UI~OI'I~~a FC:: 1i"e"tof~";'-J!~;;o*e:: 101 hU • !I"'Hll<l~-:1"~· .. tu· .. J . .. -.Je .... 'M~ I rztf""'9ft""ffl h:lrr "" •N~. """'"" (<m!~: ~;.:al J!-".:a" l!"' ,,)v:.;;~r 1UJ »~~ ,.,..,.11-a*'>r _,...,.,,-~'""~"'<-•::~"'(lr;.M<'>~­.. «:.t•~.-.-cr-..,..._~..."r.nt>h••- ~" ~ • --• t &M~~<;U .. ,~ .... ,, w·mt"'•y:'Vltr WV•P"'"fSlt'ld ·~wrmtw!ftt

lr~~n~tt::' •;-. • ., ... r-..oOI'":tcd'n.'!l-tJ " ""d~FX:;r~.l _.,, ~ . ,.,.,.. .. ' W•01U"''- U1"'••f'~!"j:< • •.. ..,_...,..Jtl..,..-".+_ fO!":t *:. H....v-.!!"<ltlt~....",....lllr,X.;r.-l:r;~l·-llll...-ol{l-

r._...t" ..... ~a!O'~"ho,;t ..... "(;C-...CbHOI .... ~ '" "~' ~&'U~ .. . 'Ilf ... ~~'WS .. G.<V' ... ~

-~

"'• FCC•illl&!tc<;;;.er"'l"'l•r.u.• "*.,, • .....,..U<~t " r,e~::rtlt.lM , , ... ~;~:-..,._ ':t' t(ll.a·Q•I "'lt'r.:F s ::l'ru <K.;. ~--ue:.pa i'IN~.o+Kt.-::tn.nN-... '!:.-n~- ~ - ..,...,~:<~•

,,.,.PC:,...••P•7~•~<•t..~•• ..,l•-l' ".,<:.:.~r t-<1 ~·~~·"-; 1-..FOr!uo.,....Mt<~-~ -) W>te~Yo r.t-Jb.)IH<::It : ~,..,......,.,..,_

6#-:w,,_.ff~~...,,.....,~tllll~il-lt't '* :>e~,_,~1~ · . ...,t>t .. re.-~."lll""~'~"~ll'fn'-lllo'"U --~.~ <lt<lll"' ,.".. .. ~ ij. tnlb'l~ ~ ... ..o::: lff oob M\'t":''...",. J.t.Of'.e" .... t!'4 ~~.-••

~~, .... ,~•;l#• 'c'O,......"..I'.·"ff~f· -"""a!:.• .. ~lfW~;jo l,.. .... llllli<:'/rt"~ll'>'l'

"....,~.,.....,..,l:lt<.,.~-~F.:co~.~r~,.-~-·:.o."" ". .. ,n ......... ;:f~:t~ " Ufnll~]!i."'lf II!W?temfyproooel !'Jr~:r~;,;..·,q;. r...::ht ·'<:6~~:l{;;~Jn .. 'N~"' tK!IDf"N,. ".~- .. .,.... _. .• ,.. • ..-,._.u .. -•rdl"'"_,~......, notto., .. --.-....,1~~.-.-~:tl tr.~.._, ..... IN!JIIC..••II ~. Y1Cf1t:IIW4~:.f ''Q'<.t<lflt',C- .,, . f'Wl:;l't.,;c:

I think the answer tothat question is simple. Disturbing, but simple. The IPCC is an elaborate illusion.

lt is an illusion so effective that many of the people involved sincerely buy into it. They believe it.

Here's how the IPCC describes itself on its website. ln a few paragraphs, the ward 'scientific' appears 6 times. 'Scientists' are also mentioned.

This is the illusion. Over and over again, we're told that what goes on at the IPCC is 'science.'

The first sentence in paragraph 2 is explicit. lt declares: "The IPCC is a scientific body ... "

Slide 19

Slide 20

Slide 21

T!Mir!II':Q(Wr'>"W'lllif'il>tOIO..::Ii"'~iO~ ... ~_fS.".:.»r:~..um--...-~·:...,. --~_,.do>'.JtO-a~ "IU>_"W..,.,.._IJr-•u. ........ F'""'"'""' ;;:;;;;..~:::. ~-~ , :.·~=.,.;mw.::v.;."; ;.;:so:,r;;~ ß~et'.'-niJS~I,l"'lt"'CCKK!!i1N~---II>I!S'~.II ~..;. .....:0.-<'·tlo ldot.!;. I'!TPuotUUfF't<!""(l!:t>W#Iof.s.!uFCC

But an organization is not a scientific body simply because scientists are involved. A baseball team made up of scientists is not a scientific body.

A chess club whose members happen to be scientists is not a scientific body.

lf the IPCC were a scientific body, it would do science. But it does not.

Take a Iook at the last sentence in paragraph two. The IPCC admits that it does not conduct any research.

No science actually takes place at the IPCC.

The job of IPCC personnel is to survey already existing scientific research and to write reports about what that researchteils us about climate change.

ln the process, a great deal of human judgment is involved. Fallible human judgment.

IPCC personnel decide that some studies are worth paying attention to- and that others belong in the dustbin.

They decide that certain unproven assumptions should be treated seriously - but not others.

Slide 22

Slide 23

Slide 24

Judgment calls arenot science. They may be relying on their knowledge of scientific matters, but IPCC personnel are actually playing a role similar to jurors at a trial.

When a jury evaluates evidence and draws conclusions no one calls that 'science.'

So if the IPCC is not a scientific body- what it is it?

lt's an organization on a mission.

This is the front cover of an IPCC brochure from its meeting in Yokohama, Japan last month. Notice the IPCC logo down at the bottom.

This is not a parody. This is not an image created by a critic in order to poke fun at the IPCC. This is for real.

The IPCC thinks it's in the business of delivering HOPE FOR OUR EARTH. lt thinks its job is to SAVE THE PLANET.

Slide 25

Slide 26

Here's a paragraph from page 2 ofthat brochure. lt's titled: Saving the Planet for Future Generations.

[minute to read]

Now what I - or you - owe hypothetical future generations is a philosophical question. lt may also be a moral and spiritual one. lt is definitely not a SCIENTIFIC matter.

The IPCC wants it both ways. On its website it talks about science, science, science. But that's just the costume, the illusion. ln reality, the IPCC is pushing a philosophical point-of-view.

We, the public, have been excluded from the discussion about what we might owe future generations. Dressed in its science costume, the IPCC presumes to make that decision for us.

This is anti-democratic. This is the illusion of science being used to advance a philosophical position.

Future generations. Taking action.

ti I

~:

Slide 27

Slide 28

Slide 29

"""'""""" .,.,, "'~

Donna Laframboise

blog: NoFrakkingConsensus.com

Who else is obsessed with future generations and "taking action"?

The IPCC says it is a scientific body. But it behaves like an activist organization.

And that is why none of us - whether we are members of the public, working scientists, or government officials- should take advice from the IPCC.

This is not a credible body. Rather than delivering science, it gives us activist dogma.

[the end]