Journalist Looks Into UN Climate Report, Finds That it was Authored by Students, Activists

1 minute, 28 seconds Read

cropped-climbers1.jpg

We’ve all been told the science is settled; look no further. Surrender even more power, money and freedom to governments, and allow governments to impose drastic restrictions on fossil-fuel consumption to save us all from manmade global warming. In 2001, Canadian reporter Donna Laframboise, a former National Post and Toronto Star columnist, began looking into the recurring claim that 97 percent of climate scientists agree with the hysteria over manmade global warming. She found that those promoting this perspective are overwhelmingly drawn from the ranks of socialist ideologues who have been promoting socialism and expansive government for generations.
Again and again, Laframboise found that the “97 percent” claim rested on reports by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). She expected to find that the IPCC reports were authored by the finest scientific minds in the world. Instead she found that many of the authors are longtime professional socialist activists and even students. For example, Richard Moss, a vice president of the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), was in the inner circle who wrote the IPCC chapters on wildlife extinction. Conveniently, the chapter’s conclusions are almost identical to the conclusions of the WWF.
Another IPCC author, Bill Hare, is a longtime employee of Greenpeace. Michael Oppenheimer, a 20-year employee of the Environmental Defense Fund, was among the lead authors of the IPCC reports. Jennifer Morgan, another WWF employee and a chief spokesperson, was also an IPCC author. “Who really writes IPCC reports?” Laframboise asks: “Students, unqualified scientists, activists.”
At least one-third of the references cited in the IPCC reports were not peer reviewed by scientists. Sources Included press releases, student papers presented at conferences, and even Greenpeace Newsletters. In several cases, actual peer-reviewed literature existed which contradicted the nonpeer-reviewed literature that was referenced by the IPCC.

Similar Posts