- inhalers

September 2, 2010: UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) needs fundamental changes - see Report on InterAcademy Council IPCC Review Website:  As reported in the press:

  • "UN climate experts 'overstated dangers': Keep your noses out of politics, scientists told", by Fiona Macrae, The Mail On-line, London, United Kingdom. "UN climate change experts have been accused of making 'imprecise and vague' statements and over-egging the evidence. A scathing report into the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change called for it to avoid politics and stick instead to predictions based on solid science." Read whole piece.
  • "U.N. climate body needs 'fundamental reform,' says report", by Thair Shaikh, CNN, U.S.A. "The United Nations' climate body needs to "fundamentally reform" if it is to prevent a repeat of the error that led to the publishing of a report warning that Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035, an international committee reported Monday." Read whole piece.
  • "IPCC told to stop lobbying and restrict role to explaining climate science", by Stephen Adams and Robert Winnett, The Daily Telegraph, London, United Kingdom. "Harold Shapiro, a Princeton University professor and chair of the committee that conducted the review, said that a report by an IPCC working group "contains many statements that were assigned high confidence but for which there is little evidence."  Read whole piece.
  • "UN slams IPCC on report", India Today. "The inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been told not to make policy suggestions based on weak scientific evidence and to clearly convey uncertainties connected with climate change while preparing its assessment reports." Read whole piece.
  • "Matt Ridley: This Discredited IPCC Process Must Be Purged - We cannot make sane decisions on global warming if the ‘experts’ present us with evidence that is biased, The Times, London, United Kingdom. "Yesterday, after a four-month review, a committee of scientists concluded that the Nobel prize-winning IPCC has “assigned high confidence to statements for which there is very little evidence”, has failed to enforce its own guidelines, has been guilty of too little transparency, has ignored critical review comments and has had no policies on conflict of interest”. Read whole piece.
  • "Climate change body told: Get facts right", by Stephen Foley, New Zealand Herald. "Authors reported high confidence in some statements for which there is little evidence. Furthermore, by making vague statements that were difficult to refute, authors were able to attach "high confidence" to the statements', it said. One summary for policy makers 'contains many such statements that are not supported sufficiently in the literature, not put into perspective, or not expressed clearly'." Read whole piece.
  • "Big changes proposed to UN climate panel", The Associated Press, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation Web site.  "Still, Shapiro said the way the report expressed confidence in scientific findings was incomplete and at times even misleading. In the panel's first report, which is about the physical causes of global warming, scientists may have underestimated how confident they were in their conclusions, Shapiro said. But the second report, about the effects on daily life, in at least one instance claimed high confidence when there was no backing for that, he said." Read whole piece.