The Environmental Protection Agency made no bones about where it shopped for its science, proudly proclaiming that the IPCC had done such a good job that they did not need to do their (mandatory) independent assessment of the risks posed to U.S. citizens from greenhouse gases, which they now propose to regulate. Now, however, they are not so proud of the IPCC... although their Endangerment Finding relies heavily on the IPCC and uses some of the IPCC's more questionable reporting.
Hat tip to Charlie Martin and Pajamas Media, from which I quote: "During the review of the Environmental Protection Agency budget in today’s Senate Environment and Public Works Committee hearing, both Senator Barbara Boxer — the chair of the committee — and EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson distanced themselves from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report (AR4)."
Both Boxer and Jackson appeared to be trying to distance the EPA from the IPCC report. Boxer said:
In my opening statement, I didn’t quote one international scientist or IPCC report. … We are quoting the American scientific community here.
When Inhofe directly asked Jackson if she still considered the IPCC report the “gold standard,” she answered:
"The primary focus of the endangerment finding was on climate threat risks in this country."
Jackson also noted:
"[The errors Inhofe had presented were] international events. The information on the glaciers and other events doesn’t weaken … the evidence we considered [to make the Endangerment Finding on CO2.]"
So, just how independent is the IPCC's findings? Not very--the Technical Support Document averages almost two references to the IPCC on every page, and both the Endangerment Finding and the Technical Support Document contain direct reference to IPCC findings that have been revealed to be suspect, due to inadequate sourcing or plain error.
From the EPA's Response to Public Comments, Volume 1: "In fact, these assessment reports look
at the range of the scientific literature without “cherry-picking” and it is EPA’s conclusion that by placing
primary reliance on the major assessment reports, we have ensured that the determinations are based on reports that have considered and weighed all views. EPA relied on the major peer-reviewed assessment reports in developing the TSD precisely to avoid an over-reliance on and narrow consideration of individual studies and to ensure that the Administrator’s decision would be based on a comprehensive assessment of the scientific literature."
Number of times the IPCC is mentioned in the Endangerment Finding itself: 49 (in a 52 page document)
Bonus Quote No. 1: The conclusion in the assessment literature that there is the potential for hurricanes to become more intense (and even some evidence that Atlantic hurricanes have already become more intense) reinforces the judgment that coastal communities are now endangered by human-induced climate change, and may face substantially greater risk in the future.
Number of times the IPCC is mentioned in the Technical Support Document to the Endangerment Finding: 396 (in a 210 page document)
Bonus Quote No. 2: Glacier melt in the Himalayas is projected to increase flooding and rock avalanches from destabilized slopes and to affect water resources within the next two to three decades.
Bonus Quote No. 3: The power and frequency of Atlantic hurricanes have increased substantially in
recent decades.
Bonus Quote No. 4: By mid-century, increases in temperature and associated decreases in soil water are projected to lead to gradual replacement of tropical forest by savanna in eastern Amazonia.
Steve Mosher and I have written a book about the leaked emails that have caused so much controversy. The title is Climategate: The CRUtape Letters. It is available on Create Space here, Amazon here, Kindle here and Lulu here. One Amazon reviewer wrote, "Mosher and Fuller do a good job putting the ClimateGate documents in context, and the book is a riveting read. I received my copy yesterday, and find the book to be faithful to the climate war events that I have followed over a period of years. It reports actual email communications of a small group of paleoclimatologists and their roles in perhaps the biggest scientific hoax since Piltdown Man."
Comments
Has anyone checked how many references were made to discredited IPPC claims in US EPA vs Massachusetts in support of regulating CO2? Is there precedent for rehearing in cases were false information is presented to the Court?
Boxer has been caught in another lie. Yesterday, they played recent comments from her indicating confidence and reliance on the IPCC.
Now we are experiencing massive snow falls and the CAGW folks claim it is due to global warming.
Listen to past comments from Boxer and other idiots in Congress when there was less snowfall, then decide if you trust these people as they now change their tune.
Note that Boxer also referencces the IPCC in one of her speeches.
It is scarey, how much control Boxer might have over our life.
Watch
www.youtube.com/watch?v=d70iXVN5EVM
If they are only focusing on the US, then the science might be a bit different. The warming signal hasn't shown up as much in the US, and we've been told by the scientists that this has nothing to do with the US having the most thermometers with the longer recordkeeping, but that the effects are different on different regions.
This article is full of scientific errors and fallacies.
From a historical perspective, the EPA acted correctly and according to the principles of scientific climatism.
Scientific climatism investigates the laws, patterns, ways, and forms of climate struggle and a climate revolution, and, ultimately, the development and the construction of a Climatist state.
Scientific climatism empowers the working classes of proletariat, progressive peasantry and revolutionary intelligentsia. A dictatorship of the climatariat is a necessary evolutionary step toward the establishment of a Climatist state.
state.
Scientific climatism empowers the working classes of proletariat, progressive peasantry and revolutionary intelligentsia. A dictatorship of the climatariat is a necessary evolutionary step toward the establishment of a Climatist state.
Dearest Dieter, you are undoubtedly correct and I relinquish all authority to you forthwithly.
Keep reading and researching for yourself. Thank god for the Internet (not Al). Without it we would still be subject to only the state propaganda. Good column Thomas!
Earlier this week Boxer tried to distance herself from the IPCC and it's numerous errors.
But check out this article where she heaps praise on the IPCC and specifically Pachauri.
I wonder if she can sleep at night!
climatequotes.com/2010/02/24/barbara-boxer-relied-heavily-on-both-the-ipcc-and-pachauri/
I wish to thank the author for one of the first truthful reports I have seen printed in the US media.
The EPA is a F---ing joke, they lied through their faces about the 9/11 dust. Their about as credible as the flying spaghetti monster. There needs to be arrests and public hangings of public officials who lie...that will put a stop to the lying REAL QUICK!
So anything they say is a lie anymore, they need to disband immediately, they can no longer be believed.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!