Sobre este tema, esta semana tem-se falado muito deste documento de David Holland, muito critico em relação ao IPCC. O autor descreve o que se tem passado nos últimos anos, os erros que foram surgindo, as correcções, algumas trapalhadas, a falta de transparência ou mesmo os deficientes mecanismos de validação.
http://homepages.tesco.net/~kate-and-david/2007/Holland(2007).pdf (PDF 34 páginas)
BIAS AND CONCEALMENT IN THE IPCC PROCESS: THE
“HOCKEY-STICK” AFFAIR AND ITS IMPLICATIONS
David Holland
ABSTRACT
The climatic “hockey stick” hypothesis has systemic problems. I review how the
IPCC came to adopt the “hockey stick” as scientific evidence of human
interference with the climate. I report also on independent peer reviewed studies
of the “hockey stick” that were instigated by the US House of Representatives in
2006, and which comprehensively invalidated it. The “divergence” problem and
the selective and unreliable nature of tree ring reconstructions are discussed, as is
the unsatisfactory review process of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report that
ignored the invalidation of the “hockey stick”. The error found recently in the
GISS temperature series is also noted. It is concluded that the IPCC has neither the
structure nor the necessary independence and supervision of its processes to be
acceptable as the monopoly authority on climate science. Suggestions are made as
to how the IPCC could improve its procedures towards producing reports and
recommendations that are more scientifically sound
http://homepages.tesco.net/~kate-and-david/2007/Holland(2007).pdf (PDF 34 páginas)