Posted 25 October 2011
Watch Toronto-based researcher Donna Laframboise deconstruct the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on Charles Adler, Sun Media TV. Ms. Laframboise is the author of "The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the World's Top Climate Expert", a book that describes how the IPCC includes green lobbyists and others too biased, or too misinformed to have any place on such an important UN body. Ms. Laframboise maintains noconsensus.org, a website that argues that there is no scientific consensus on global warming.
View video here
DONNA SUPPORTED BY LONGTIME EXPERT REVIEWER
Comments on Donna's book by Dr Vincent Gray, expert reviewer of all IPCC Assessment Reviews so far
Dr Gray writes:
I have now purchased and skipped though this book having downloaded the free software for PC.
As I had anticipated, I endorse everything she says. The IPCC is a political organisation set up to impose on the world a pseudo scientific theory of the climate, in a manner that is persistently and universally dishonest.
All the same, it falls short of the main aim which I have pursued since the beginning. In order to deal with a dragon, trying to put out the flames, trying to get it to obey the rules, or destroying its reputation, do not go far enough. You have to go for the heart, and that is what I have tried to do.
The heart is the outrageous "greenhouse" model of the climate which has displaced traditional meteorology in order to sell to the world the belief that humans are destroying it
Donna's book helps by showing that this has been done by unfair means, but there are still people who are convinced that there is enough truth in their phony model to support the damaging economic consequences that have followed from it.
Although I have been an expert commentator on the IPCC from the start in 1990 and I made 1898 comments on the last Report, 16% of the total, I had never heard that this book was planned and I presume other reviewers were also neglected. I have never before heard of the InterAcademy Council and its questionnaire. possibly because I currently do not belong to any Academy.
The book largely consists of a digest of what other people say about the IPCC, mainly from the various blogs. The only contact she has ever had with any of the original Reports seems to be the inquiry on the affiliations of authors and the audit carried out on peer reviewed references. There is no evidence she has ever seen the reports themselves or any of the comments on the last report which have been published, There is also no reference or discussion to the Climategate Scandal which revealed so much about the dishonest treatment of critics.
She places far more attention on the Second and Third Volumes of the last report. I tended to ignore them as it was obvious that most of the writers were WWF or Greenpeace activists and they were based on assuming that the worst case recommendations of WGI were true.