Leaks and pre-empting the inevitable

20 Dec 2012

A sometimes contributor at http://wattsupwiththat.com, one Alec Rawle, a reviewer of the IPCC papers in progress for the forthcoming IPCC Report on the 'state of the climate as envisaged by the current batch of climate crop on parade and the various activist groups lurking in the background, has leaked the documents in draft format, prior to polishing and re-engineering what the scientists may nor may not be saying. The leak, he claims, was necessary as the IPCC system will ultimately lead to a distortion of the contents, with an emphasis on the human element. He further claims the draft report shows the Sun also played a strong role in recent global warming, otherwise unacknowledged in previous published IPCC literature. In other words, he was worried that the role of the Sun would again be sidelined in the forthcoming Report in its final format, the science airbrushed away as it was unwelcome as far as the CAGW faithful were concerned. We might also note, he thinks this is what has been happening to the science in earlier Reports, where it is now known that activists have had a controlling finger on the beat of the debate. In leaking the draft report Rawle hopes to neuter any deletion of the science - which will still occur, but perhaps not quite as blatantly as it has happened in the past. The idea is to create a report that is acceptable to all parties - and that includes activists, NGOs, and the odd scientist.

The reaction of the CAGW faithful can be viewed at http://phys.org/print274966336.html ... and is fairly predictable. Various non-scientists are quoted, such as Lewandowsky, and the archdeacon that writes the final draft for publication. The scientists themselves, or the science, is ignored, but clearly they are a bit miffed as some of their thunder has been stolen. The leak, however, is not as explosive as some sceptics at first imagined as the faithful will only read what their heroes tell them, not anything to the contrary. It will be useful as people, if they wish, will be able to compare the two versions, the unpublished draft copy and the final well written and agenda driven final version - but how many people will wish to compare. Only the sceptics, we might expect, as the CAGW faithful will have been warned off - and lets face it science hasn't really got anything to do with CAGW. It's all in the head. While it may be obvious to the general layman that the Sun plays a major role in temperatures on Earth, surprisingly, large numbers of the faithful are prepared to scream foul and say the Sun has very little influence, at all. Remarkable as that might be it is not as awesome as the proclivity of the faithful to resist any contrary notion even if their wings are pulled off, followed by their limbs, ears, and protruding parts, as for as long as they have tongues they will chant the mantra.