U.n. Global Warming Report: Scientific Findings Were Mostly Ignored

1. What the science in the report actually says
2. What the policy makers who wrote the report, claim, the science, says

The science should have made all global warming zealots back off big time. This report throws serious doubt on some vital information in previous reports written by the same IPCC in 1990, 1995 and 2001.

The study was done by scientists and the report was written by policy makers, many of whom, possibly all of whom, have an agenda. In fact many of these policy wonks, work for governments who preach climate fear, to advance the Global Warming agenda.

In the Mainstream Media, those who tilt left loved the findings of the report which advanced the doom and gloom aspects found therein. The MM fell almost totally silent on the science.

Voters should also know, that contributions from respected scientists are often rejected, by this U. N. group, as they were in this report, for not advancing the global warming cause.

The New Report

The new report shows that when the U.N. did its 2001 assessment of the human influence on climate change since the Industrial Revolution, it had overestimated that influence by at least one-third.

Reporting on sea level, the 2001 report stated a rise in sea level of 3 feet. In this latest report, that amount is less than half of 3 feet-17 inches.

Not only did sea levels not rise as high as formerly predicted; the pace at which they rose was much slower than predicted.

The three previous IPCC reports also did not report that oceans would cool, which they have done significantly since 2003. This also throws serious doubt on recent claims about the frequency and intensity of hurricanes.

The full scientific report has not yet been released. However, just from the limited information known so far, there is much that should make the Greens examine the science more carefully and take the time necessary for honest dialogue on the matter.

Serious claims made with such certainty in previous reports, now show reduced numbers. Also the rise in temperatures since the last report has been miniscule.

It should always be kept in mine, that much of what has been predicted over the years has been based on computer simulations. In many cases these models are inaccurate. The tiny rise in temperatures and the unexpected ocean cooling are just two, of many examples.

Let’s hold our judgment until May when the full report comes out. When it does we would be wise to focus on the science to the best of our ability.
Mick McNesby is a former tax advisor, consultant and negotiator. He was a frequent guest on political talk shows in Atlantic City, N.J., discussing the benefits of the lower cost of government. He can be visited at Conservative-Politics-Infofind.Com