Leo Tolstoy, obviously not writing explicity about climate science, but his words resonate nonetheless:
“I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives.”
This is quoted in a very nice article by Dr. Tim Ball on how the UN IPCC operates to supress dissenting science and keep up the illusion of "settled science" behind global warming catastrophism. An excerpt:
It is claimed the scientists set the final summary content, but in reality governments set the form. The SPM [summary for policy-makers] is then released at least three months before the science report. Most of the scientists involved in the technical or science report see the Summary for the first time when it is released to the public. The time between its release to the public and the release of the Technical Report is taken up with making sure it aligns with what the politicians/scientists have concluded. Here is the instruction in the IPCC procedures. “Changes (other than grammatical or minor editorial changes) made after acceptance by the Working Group or the Panel shall be those necessary to ensure consistency with the Summary for Policymakers (SPM) or the Overview Chapter.” Yes, you read that correctly. This is like an Executive writing a summary and then having employees write a report that agrees with the summary.
This quote from Douglas Adams’ “Dirk Gently’s Holistic Detective Agency” seems eerily appropriate:
Looks like the IPCC is using REASON 2.0.
Gentlemen: I am in the process of starting up a corrupt people-to-fuels processing plant located conveniently located in the outskirts of Washington D.C. While the current US Congress should provide ample feedstock for the present, I am always on the lookout for expansion opportunities.
I take it from your article that the IPCC organisation should be a rich source of feedstock for my proprietary corrupt people-to-fuels process. If you can kindly direct me to the location of the main IPCC headquarters, I will be able to instigate site-location procedures for locating a likely site for one of our expansion biofuel facilities.
As you may know, the waste by-products of turkey and pig meat processing is quite usefully turned into biodiesel using thermochemical processes. Our proprietary processes are capable of doing the same with the bodies of corrupt politicians. Far from being a joke, gentlemen, this may represent the great breakthrough in renewable energy technologies that the world has been waiting for.
Your cooperation is greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
AF
That they do do it is bad enough. That they get away with it is worse. That people believe the output of the IPCC is just plain sad. How would the average person know that they are being misled?
The idea of making a useful product from otherwise useless politicians and beurocrats is something worth pursuing Al Fin. Good luck with your new product.
Al Fin,
That’s the sort of comment that gets picked up by the other side, to the detriment of our credibility and reputation. It’s also tasteless and disproportionate. Just because they do it doesn’t mean we should.
I can’t tell you what you can and can’t say, but if you’re genuinely sceptical then I’d ask you not to, please. Or at least not to do it here. TIA.
Stevo:
And they say only leftists and feminists don’t have a sense of humour!
Nice satire on the humourless, bucko! You had me going for a moment there.
😉
Unfortunately burning politicians for fuel will release too much hot air.