headermask image

header image

IPCC error rate: You were expecting something else?

Posted on: February 12, 2010 9:43 AM, by James Hrynyshyn

Via the ever-vigilant Stoat, I draw your attention to a letter to the Netherlands parliament from by 55 Netherlands scientists. Along with the usual “the science remains sound” defense of our understanding of anthropogenic global warming, it provides some useful perspective:
The writing of IPCC reports and its quality control remains the work of humans. A guarantee for an error free report is an unachievable ideal, however much an error free report is highly desired

Just as a thousand private emails are bound to include a few intemperate remarks and elucidation of wishful thinking, the thousands of pages of reports that draw on 18,000 sources were bound include a few dubious references. Anyone who finds the current error rate (3 or 4, depending on who’s counting) should read Stephen Schneider’s Science as a Contact Sport for insight into just how incredible it is that the IPCC quality control process is a rigorous as it is.

If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*

Anti-Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree