NEWS FLASH: IPCC Lies And Distortions Continue

[Ext User(Bonzoo)]

IPCC Summary For Policymakers Released On 2 Feb 2007 Is A Fraud

Most of the news coverage neglected to mention that the
document released on Feb. 2 by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change was not the latest multiyear assessment report, which will run to
something like 1,500 pages when it is released in May. It was only the
21-page "Summary for Policymakers," a document written chiefly by government
bureaucrats -- not scientists -- and intended to shape public opinion.
Perhaps the summary will turn out to be a faithful reflection of the
scientists' conclusions, but it wouldn't be the first time if it doesn't.
In years past, scientists contributing to IPCC assessment reports have
protested that the policymakers' summary distorted their findings -- for
example, by presenting as unambiguous what were actually only tentative
conclusions about human involvement in global warming. This time around, the
summary is even more confident: It declares it "unequivocal" that the Earth
has warmed over the past century and "very likely" -- meaning more than 90
percent certain -- that human activity is the cause.


Regards

Bonzo

[Ext User(Bonzoo)]

IPCC Summary For Policymakers Released On 2 Feb 2007 Is A Fraud

Oddly enough, most of the news coverage neglected to mention that the
document released on Feb. 2 by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change was not the latest multiyear assessment report, which will run to
something like 1,500 pages when it is released in May. It was only the
21-page "Summary for Policymakers," a document written chiefly by government
bureaucrats -- not scientists -- and intended to shape public opinion.
Perhaps the summary will turn out to be a faithful reflection of the
scientists' conclusions, but it wouldn't be the first time if it doesn't.
In years past, scientists contributing to IPCC assessment reports have
protested that the policymakers' summary distorted their findings -- for
example, by presenting as unambiguous what were actually only tentative
conclusions about human involvement in global warming. This time around, the
summary is even more confident: It declares it "unequivocal" that the Earth
has warmed over the past century and "very likely" -- meaning more than 90
percent certain -- that human activity is the cause.

That climate change is taking place no one doubts; the Earth's climate is
always in flux. But is it really so clear-cut that the current warming,
which amounts to less than 1 degree Celsius over the past century, is
anthropogenic? Or that continued warming will lead to the meteorological
chaos and massive deaths that alarmists predict? It is to the media. By and
large they relay only the apocalyptic view: Either we embark on a radical
program to slash carbon-dioxide emissions -- that is, to arrest economic
growth -- or we are doomed, as NBC's Matt Lauer put it last week, to "what
literally could be the end of the world as we know it."

Perhaps the Chicken Littles are right and the sky really is falling, but
that opinion is hardly unanimous. There are quite a few skeptical
scientists, including eminent climatologists, who doubt the end-of-the-world
scenario. Why don't journalists spend more time covering all sides of the
debate instead of just parroting the scaremongers?

Regards

Bonzo

[Ext User(Carole)]

"Bonzoo" <boozoo@iinet.com.au> wrote in message
news:45caaf93$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> IPCC Summary For Policymakers Released On 2 Feb 2007 Is A Fraud
>
> Most of the news coverage neglected to mention that the
> document released on Feb. 2 by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
> Change was not the latest multiyear assessment report, which will run to
> something like 1,500 pages when it is released in May. It was only the
> 21-page "Summary for Policymakers," a document written chiefly by
government
> bureaucrats -- not scientists -- and intended to shape public opinion.
> Perhaps the summary will turn out to be a faithful reflection of the
> scientists' conclusions, but it wouldn't be the first time if it doesn't.
> In years past, scientists contributing to IPCC assessment reports have
> protested that the policymakers' summary distorted their findings -- for
> example, by presenting as unambiguous what were actually only tentative
> conclusions about human involvement in global warming. This time around,
the
> summary is even more confident: It declares it "unequivocal" that the
Earth
> has warmed over the past century and "very likely" -- meaning more than 90
> percent certain -- that human activity is the cause.
>
>
> Regards
>
> Bonzo


Is climate change part of a naturally occuring cycle, due to the greenhouse
effect or weather manipulation?
IPCC is a UN organisation, along with a lot of others such as IMF, CFR, RIIA
and which influence policy and decision making, all working towards one
world government.

Carole
http://www.conspiracee.com


>
>

[Ext User(B J Foster)]

Carole wrote:

>the
>
>
>>summary is even more confident: It declares it "unequivocal" that the
>>
>>
>Earth
>
>
>>has warmed over the past century and "very likely" -- meaning more than 90
>>percent certain -- that human activity is the cause.
>>
>>
>>Regards
>>
>>Bonzo
>>
>>
Yes 'they' overlooked the fact that foil hats tend to be worn at night
which tends to reduce the black body radiation coefficient. This can
result in an increase of
up to 0.0000164 deg. overnight. During the middle ages people wore funny
black hats and temperatures rose.

>
>
>Is climate change part of a naturally occuring cycle, due to the greenhouse
>effect or weather manipulation?
>
>

No. It's due to mind manipulation ("if you believe then it will be true")


>IPCC is a UN organisation, along with a lot of others such as IMF, CFR, RIIA
>and which influence policy and decision making, all working towards one
>world government.
>
>Carole
>http://www.conspiracee.com
>
>

[Ext User(Bonzoo)]

"Carole" <hubbca2003@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:45cb62af$0$31886$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
|
| "Bonzoo" <boozoo@iinet.com.au> wrote in message
| news:45caaf93$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
| > IPCC Summary For Policymakers Released On 2 Feb 2007 Is A Fraud
| >
| > Most of the news coverage neglected to mention that the
| > document released on Feb. 2 by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate
| > Change was not the latest multiyear assessment report, which will run to
| > something like 1,500 pages when it is released in May. It was only the
| > 21-page "Summary for Policymakers," a document written chiefly by
| government
| > bureaucrats -- not scientists -- and intended to shape public opinion.
| > Perhaps the summary will turn out to be a faithful reflection of the
| > scientists' conclusions, but it wouldn't be the first time if it
doesn't.
| > In years past, scientists contributing to IPCC assessment reports have
| > protested that the policymakers' summary distorted their findings -- for
| > example, by presenting as unambiguous what were actually only tentative
| > conclusions about human involvement in global warming. This time around,
| the
| > summary is even more confident: It declares it "unequivocal" that the
| Earth
| > has warmed over the past century and "very likely" -- meaning more than
90
| > percent certain -- that human activity is the cause.
| >
| >
| > Regards
| >
| > Bonzo
|
|
| Is climate change part of a naturally occuring cycle, due to the
greenhouse
| effect or weather manipulation?



Probably due to same effect as current climate change on Mars!

Regards

Bonzo