facebook twitter subscribe

ColumbiaJournalismReview Article

InsideClimate Oil Sands

See Our Stories on Reuters

Donate to SolveClimate News

Once a day
Get Articles by e-mail:

or subscribe by RSS

Also
Get Today's Climate by e-mail:

or subscribe by RSS

view counter

Scientists Respond to IPCC Backlash

The Errors 'Do Not Alter the Key Finding' about Climate Change

By Guest Writers

Feb 11, 2010

Fifty-five scientists from the Netherlands released the following open letter about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and errors discovered in its 2007 report on climate change.

In the letter, they explain how the IPCC works, and how the errors drawing so much attention "do not alter the key finding that human beings are very likely changing the climate, with far reaching impacts in the long run."

 

Open Letter by Netherlands Scientists on IPCC and Errors in Climate Change 2007 Report

Errors in the IPCC climate change report are being seized by some to discredit climate science. In the Netherlands parliament climate scientists have recently been depicted as 'swindlers' and 'climate mafia'. Such allegations are not supported by the facts and are unwarranted. The fact that IPCC is not infallible does not make its key findings untrue or biased. Still, IPCC should become more generous in acknowledging errors rapidly and openly.

With this open letter from the Netherlands scientific community, we aim to adjust the image that has emerged. We ask to keep the public debate more in accordance to the facts. We discuss the key messages from climate science, the IPCC procedures and the quality control mechanisms of the IPCC. Finally we explain what we will do next to contribute to improvement of the IPCC practice and to the restoration of the tarnished trust in climate science.

The Climate Problem

Since 1990, our knowledge on human made climate change and the understanding of its urgency have rapidly increased. Within the natural sciences, the major components of the climate system are well understood. It is a well established fact that the amount of anthropogenic greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has increased rapidly since the industrial revolution. The major influence of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere on the temperature on the ground is a matter of elementary physics. The increasing amounts of anthropogenic greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere change the heat radiation balance of the earth, which very likely leads to higher temperatures on the ground. Measurements consistently show a world wide temperature increase of about half a degree Centigrade over the past century. The measured temperature increase lags several decades behind the changes in atmospheric composition: with present day greenhouse gas concentrations the temperature is expected to further increase by at least 1°C in the coming decades.

The increase in greenhouse gas concentrations is mainly caused by the way in which coal, oil and natural gas are being used and by deforestation. Major uncertainties exist regarding future greenhouse gas emissions and their impacts. Studies by reputable research groups show that projected emissions of greenhouse gases may lead to a further warming of 1,1 to 6,4°C by the year 2100 (relative to the period 1980-1999). Given the fact that the climate system exhibits tipping points, this may lead to partly unpredictable and possibly far reaching and irreversible impacts on society and nature.

The Copenhagen Accord acknowledges that dangerous human interference with the climate should be prevented. For that reason governments agreed that global warming should be limited to 2°C at maximum (compared to the preindustrial climate). Research has shown that this is economically and technically feasible with emission reduction measures and changes in consumption patterns.

The IPCC and the Fourth Assessment Report

In 1988 the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) with the aim to provide policy makers regularly with a balanced overview of the state of knowledge on climate change. IPCC is an open network organization in which renowned scientist from all over the world collaborate. These scientists are mainly from universities — including most of the Dutch universities — and research institutes such as in our country the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute (KNMI), the Energy Research Centre of the Netherlands (ECN) and the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL). At present 194 countries participate in the IPCC, including the Netherlands.

"With this open letter from

"With this open letter from the Netherlands scientific community"
Since when does the Dutch scientific community consist of 55 scientists? Must be a very low educated country. Now, I don't think Holland is a very low educated country, what I do think is that the above introduction is highly exaggerated, but then again exaggerating is part of AGW climate science as we've seen in the very same IPCC?

It's nice of these scientists to defend a crippled organisation like IPCC, but it's not for cooks to demand their customers to like their food. If it's lousy food they have to do a better job.

All Dutch Universities Represented

There are 14 public universities in the Netherlands. Here's a list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_universities_in_the_Netherlands

All 14 Dutch universities are represented by signers of that letter. I'm sure the commenter knew that and just assumed he could manipulate the rest of us.

Dutch Scientists sign an open letter

All the many hundreds of scientists having a job studying the consequences of climate change are shaking in their boots it seems.
As soon as there is 100% evidence that CO-2 is the main driver of climate, as we are being forced-fed by these guys and gals, evidence that is 100% water tight and not the result of highly unreliable computer models, then and only then will I support this cause. For now, all these people making a living studying the effects of climate change are irrelevant to the issue. If we need to adapt, so be it. We have done that before. Perhaps they can help and advise with that.
Relevant is this: study the cause of climate change and find water tight evidence for that. That climate changes, is something we have known for as long as there are humans. I don't need a scientist or an Al Gore to tell me that.
What we want to know for sure (and not yet another shaky hypothesis) is: what is the cause? That means study all aspects, not just a tiny, tiny part of the puzzle alone and then decide that less than a single % of all factors (CO-2) is responsible for the change in climate because it is so easy and convenient to tax something that we all use and generate.
The lies and deception in the name of "science" have been unbearable.
When it did not snow, it was proof of Global Warming.
Now the abundance of snow is evidence of Global Warming. Yeah, sure.

This is what I understand

This is what I understand that the scientists are saying
There are plenty of unknowns, we know that there are unknown and known data, the unknown data predicts that there may be an unknown event sometime in unknown future, although this is also unknown. Because there is so many unknown unknowns, this unknown event may, because it is not known, cause some kind of unknown or known damage to the environment.
The damage may or may not be known damage, it could be unknown damage. Reversing unknown or known damage is, well unknown

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <p> <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <h1> <h2> <h3> <ul> <li> <ol> <b> <i> <p> <br>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Youtube and google video links are automatically converted into embedded videos.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Images can be added to this post.

More information about formatting options