NCPA’s Burnett: “If This Happened in Court, Convictions Would Be Tossed”

Dallas, TX, September 2 – The recently released report of the InterAcademy Council (IAC) criticizing the methods and decision criteria used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) further underscores the IPCC’s shoddy review standards and lack of scientific rigor, according to NCPA Senior Fellow H. Sterling Burnett.

“This review was long overdue and only further supports claims of prominent skeptics that the IPCC has operated as a political rather than a scientific body,” Dr. Burnett said. “The IAC report recognizes the IPCC’s apparently deliberate misrepresentations have contributed heavily to growing skepticism about the dire predictions of climate calamity.”

The IAC report concluded that the IPCC’s research standards were “shoddy” and that the panel made a plethora of claims that lacked substantial scientific support. In addition, the IAC report concluded that the IPCC had ignored substantial critiques by prominent skeptics of man-made climate change.

“While the IAC was not charged with addressing the underlying science of climate change, at best its conclusions gave no more than tepid support for the argument that humans are causing serious climate change,” Burnett added.

“Furthermore,” Burnett asked, “In what other field of science where a reviewing body concludes that standards of research were shoddy, methodologies were flawed, claims were not substantiated and scientists crossed the line from research to activism would the body of work still merit serious consideration?”