And from the presentation slides, regarding the focus of this assessment:
Media reported on errors in regional chapters of the Working Group II Report (impacts. adaptation, and vulnerability to climate change)Investigation focused on 8 regional chapters in Working Group II Report, and on carry-over in summary of the IPCC Synthesis ReportReports Working Groups I and III not investigatedMedia reported on errors in regional chapters of the Working Group II Report (impacts. adaptation, and vulnerability to climate change)Investigation focused on 8 regional chapters in Working Group II Report, and on carry-over in summary of the IPCC Synthesis ReportReports Working Groups I and III not investigated
Tags: assessment, errors, IPCC, PBL
July 6, 2010 at 05:29
I guess the headline should be “IPCC Exonerated Again”.
While there were certainly some weaknesses in WGII, mostly with their citation policies, the conclusions stand. You can always do better, and the IPCC is getting input (well, were getting input since the deadline for comments was 1-7 2010) on how to improved their procedures.
July 6, 2010 at 07:44
For as far as I can read Dutch, I was quite amused by the Dutch skeptics pointing to wattsupwiththat and icecap as some kind of credible sources of information. Well, in all honesty, it was actually _sad_ to see that people with “professor” in front of their name suffer from such blatant confirmation bias.
July 9, 2010 at 14:08
Greatly surprised that this has gathered so few comments. The most important part of it IEHO was that WGII should look at all effects of warming, and that the previous reports have emphasized only the negative ones.
(Cue riot)
July 9, 2010 at 14:14
True. My Dutch post focussed a bit more on that, and when I find time I plan to also discuss that in an English one.