Comments on: IPCCfacts.org Responds http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4128 Wed, 29 Jul 2009 22:36:51 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Anders Valland http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4128&cpage=1#comment-8456 Anders Valland Mon, 26 Feb 2007 07:39:45 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=4128#comment-8456 CharlesH, one of the lead authors of the paleoclimate chapter in 4AR said in an interview that the hockeystick is still there, but now represented as the other 14 or so studies that show the same (see ClimateAudit.org for more on those). He also said that the spaghettigraph of those studies was not shown in the 4AR because it was a bit hard to explain to politicians.... See my translation of the Norwegin interview here (comment #14): http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1131#comments CharlesH, one of the lead authors of the paleoclimate chapter in 4AR said in an interview that the hockeystick is still there, but now represented as the other 14 or so studies that show the same (see ClimateAudit.org for more on those). He also said that the spaghettigraph of those studies was not shown in the 4AR because it was a bit hard to explain to politicians….

See my translation of the Norwegin interview here (comment #14): http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1131#comments

]]> By: charlesH http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4128&cpage=1#comment-8455 charlesH Sun, 25 Feb 2007 14:25:02 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=4128#comment-8455 Have we seen a correction from the IPCC regarding their misuse of the now discredited "hockey stick" graph. It was the smoking gun in the last report but left out of this years report. Have we seen a correction from the IPCC regarding their misuse of the now discredited “hockey stick” graph. It was the smoking gun in the last report but left out of this years report.

]]> By: bubba http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4128&cpage=1#comment-8454 bubba Sat, 24 Feb 2007 21:03:28 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=4128#comment-8454 ...well, it would have been nice if they had posted a correction, and left it up for a few weeks, noting their mischaracterizations and apologies on their site so that anyone who has already been mislead by the original document could find it. Newspapers and magazines do it all the time. But they've probably already accomplished what they originally set out to do. …well, it would have been nice if they had posted a correction, and left it up for a few weeks, noting their mischaracterizations and apologies on their site so that anyone who has already been mislead by the original document could find it.

Newspapers and magazines do it all the time.

But they’ve probably already accomplished what they originally set out to do.

]]> By: Richard Tol http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4128&cpage=1#comment-8453 Richard Tol Sat, 24 Feb 2007 08:34:08 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=4128#comment-8453 Joel: IPCCFacts did not correct the reports on the IPCC in the Guardian or FT Deutschland. In fact, when I browsed your website, you only corrected those media reports that say "the IPCC did not ring the alarm bell". This does not square with the above mission statement of IPCCFacts. Joel:

IPCCFacts did not correct the reports on the IPCC in the Guardian or FT Deutschland. In fact, when I browsed your website, you only corrected those media reports that say “the IPCC did not ring the alarm bell”. This does not square with the above mission statement of IPCCFacts.

]]>