They argued that the IPCC had done the job it was set up to do 30 years ago, but that it was no longer fit for purpose.
The "science-society contract has been broken", they wrote, adding that continuing with science as usual was no longer tenable. As a conscientious objector, Professor Glavovic's experience in South Africa taught him important lessons about the architecture of power, and how systems can be skewed to protect the powerful.
But today, again under the world's gaze, the rule of law is helping prop up the very industries that are causing climate change, Professor Glavovic says. Report co-author Tim Smith, a human geographer and professor of sustainability at the University of the Sunshine Coast, says they have been contacted privately by researchers who share their frustrations and are looking for a better way forward.
yes the hoax must be stopped...
3/n Individual Scientists or small groups, going it alone, wont work. And it's hard to imagine scientists, many of whom rely on governments to continue working, quitting the ICCC en masse. Though that would be glorious to see.
2/n This favours more anodyne reports. What's needed is the ability for delegations to file dissenting reports as sometimes happens with court decisions. But even agreeing to that could see some governments pull out. Especially those with strong fossil fuel influence.
1/n The nature of the IPCC process means that reports are arrived at by consensus. In other words, every national delegation has to agree with the final wording. It's how Reagan's Whitehouse turned 'global warming' into climate change'.
So they want to be activists not scientists.
As more variability kicks in it is going to make such reports increasingly redundant: Our climate scientists may serve the community better in focusing their energy elsewhere; saving lives and investments by helping people adapt to what is coming, a focus on regional changes.
Our current world shows we (humanity) are 50 times less likely to die from climate than 100 years ago. We have never seen such low deaths. Our crop yields are the highest in our history. These are the facts. Climate change is anti-human propaganda.
The lPPC have 30 years of failed predictions
Science has always been about providing information that helps others make better choices. Scientists aren't the decision makers, nor should they be.
After 30 years of reports & billions spent, the uncertainty of predictions hasn’t decreased. In fact the more they have studied the climate, the more factors & feedbacks (positive & negative) they have found. The science is in no way settled. The climate models are junk.
Withdrawing support for IPCC, a radical way to highlight policy makers failure to effectively respond? Faaark, wet tissue, sorry, think again.
If climate change was real, Bill Gates, Al Gore and the rest of these frauds wouldn't be buying waterfront mansions.
They won't be stopped if Australia insists on opening up new coal mines or allows more offshore drilling. The government is not serious.
oh no its time to move to .........
Albo Climate Change is the biggest threat we face, Listen to the Science? Hmm: 1100 scientists say (pic)
Climate science is not to believed and neither is the ABC.
iPCC has no credibility
i doubt they’ll be stopped - we must document exactly what’s happening - but their frustrations are completely understandable, as is their call to activism. we’re currently on a trajectory to total disaster, and the reports do feed the notion thar this is somehow ‘under control’