« Obama Crony: Opposing Card Check Is a Terrorist Act | Main | Sarah Palin Smacksdown Abortion Fanatics »

February 1, 2010

IPCC Junk Science: This Time It's the Amazon Rainforest

Posted by The MaryHunter at February 1, 2010 12:10 PM

We reported yesterday on a newly found set of laughable nonscientific data on diminishing worldwide mountain ice that made its way into the "landmark" 2007 Intergovernmental Pannel on Climate Change (IPCC) report as a key policy point. Yet another revelation has come to light, this time involving supposed destruction of rainforests by global warming:

A STARTLING report by the UN climate watchdog that global warming might wipe out 40 per cent of the Amazon rainforest was based on an unsubstantiated claim by green campaigners who had no scientific expertise.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said in its 2007 benchmark report that even a slight change in rainfall could see swaths of the rainforest rapidly replaced by savanna grassland.
The source for its claim was a report from WWF, an environmental pressure group, which was written by two green activists. They had based their "research" on a study published in the science journal Nature, which did not assess rainfall but looked at the impact on the forest of human activity such as logging and burning. WWF said on Saturday it was launching an internal inquiry into the study.

Let's see: that's three times in as many weeks that the all-hallowed 2007 IPCC scientific report on manmade global warming/climate change has been shown to contain fabulously nonscientific data. Ignoring these little missteps, plus ClimateGate, and RussiaGate, and FedGate, any number of other AGW-related "Gates" out there, the IPCC still must have a pretty good case for enacting worldwide policies that will utterly cripple the industrialized world... yes? Anyone?

Just can't get enough of this catchy tune. Go Mann, go!

Update: Read more on the research done by Christopher Booker and Richard North to uncover AmazonGate and the other nonsense "research" in the IPCC report. There should be more coming, too. For example:

A Canadian analyst has identified more than 20 passages in the IPCC's report which cite similarly non-peer-reviewed WWF or Greenpeace reports as their authority, and other researchers have been uncovering a host of similarly dubious claims and attributions all through the report. These range from groundless allegations about the increased frequency of "extreme weather events" such as hurricanes, droughts and heatwaves, to a headline claim that global warming would put billions of people at the mercy of water shortages - when the study cited as its authority indicated exactly the opposite, that rising temperatures could increase the supply of water.

On a tip from Bergbiker.