IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) Indictments Page 1 of 3

Bozarth/Voell Arx Axiom/Vector

IPCC Indictments
Bozarth/Voell

1.IPCC is not credible..........................................................................................................2

a.Staff is mainly activists.....................................................................................................2
ABC 07 - IPCC is a non-scientific non credible organization and many of their staff
are only environmental activists .....................................................................................2
John Stossel, [reporter], “Man vs. Nature, Challenging Conventional Views About
Global Warming”, ABC News, October 19, 2007,
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Stossel/Story?id=3751219&page=1,.............................2
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) Indictments Page 2 of 3
Bozarth/Voell Arx Axiom/Vector

Indictment Specifics

1. IPCC is not credible

a. Staff is mainly activists

ABC 07 - IPCC is a non-scientific non credible organization and many of their staff
are only environmental activists
John Stossel, [reporter], “Man vs. Nature, Challenging Conventional Views About Global Warming”, ABC News, October 19, 2007,
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Stossel/Story?id=3751219&page=1,
“The fact is, when climate changes, there are gains and there are losses," said Tim Ball, who studies the history of climate change.
But, he points out, all we generally hear about is the bad news from the IPCC µ that massive group of climate scientists. Paul
Reiter of the Pasteur Institute participated in one of the IPCC drafts and Christy was a contributing
author. Both say that this Nobel Prize-winning group is not what people think it is. "The IPCC
is the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change," Reiter said. "It is governments who nominate
people. You'll find in many chapters that there are people who are not scientists at all."
Reiter claims that some of these scientists are "essentially activists" and there are some
members with affiliations to groups like Greenpeace. When the IPCC report came out,
not all its members agreed with what was said. "We were not asked to look at a particular statement and sign
our names, at all," Christy said. Reiter felt his objections were ignored and says he resigned in
frustration. But in a draft of the report, the IPCC still listed Reiter as a "contributing
author" part of the so-called consensus. "I contacted the IPCC and I said, 'Look, I've
resigned. I don't want to have anything more to do with this.' And they said, 'Well, you've
been involved, so you're still on the list.'" Reiter says he had to threaten to sue to get his name removed from the
report, although the IPCC denies that. In all the confusion surrounding the global warming debate, one thing is clear: Global warming
activists don't welcome the skepticism.”

b. Distinguished members are resigning because of IPCC Fraud

The America's Intelligence Wire 05 - An IPCC distinguished researcher resigned

from his position stating and proving that IPCC chapters are so committed to the
view that humans are causing climate change that they have lost their objectivity;
this is no new problem
“Bad Science, Politics of Global Warming Lead to Resignation; Distinguished Researcher Backs Out of IPCC Assessment.” The
America's Intelligence Wire, January 25, 2005, <accessed via HighBeam>, http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-127706758.html,
(ZV)
“DALLAS, Jan. 25 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Distinguished researcher Chris Landsea's resignation earlier
this week from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is evidence that
global warming has become politicized, according to scholars with the National Center
for Policy Analysis's (NCPA) E-Team project. "I applaud Chris Landsea's principled stand," said S. Fred Singer, E-Team
adjunct scholar and president of the Science and Environmental Project. This is yet another black mark against
the IPCC, and serves as a warning against accepting their conclusions." A research meteorologist at
the Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory of the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Landsea
noted this week in a "Dear Colleague" letter announcing his withdrawal from participation in the latest IPCC assessment report that "I
have come to view the part of the IPCC to which my expertise is relevant as having become politicized." "Landsea's
resignation provides more evidence that the lead authors of the IPCC chapters are so
committed to the view that humans are causing climate change that they have lost their
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) Indictments Page 3 of 3
Bozarth/Voell Arx Axiom/Vector
objectivity -- their commitment to following the evidence wherever it leads," said H. Sterling
Burnett, NCPA senior fellow. "This is not a new problem for the IPCC.”

The America's Intelligence Wire 05 - Claims have been made supporting Global
Warming by the IPCC, and NO evidence has been given to support it
“Bad Science, Politics of Global Warming Lead to Resignation; Distinguished Researcher Backs Out of IPCC Assessment.” The
America's Intelligence Wire, January 25, 2005, <accessed via HighBeam>, http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-127706758.html,
(ZV)
“In his letter, Landsea specifically noted comments made by Dr. Kevin Trenberth, lead author of the IPCC
assessment, at a press conference at Harvard University linking outbreaks of intense
hurricane activity, and especially the 2004 Atlantic hurricane season, to global warming.
Noting that none of the authors at the Harvard conference are experts nor did they cite
any new research in the field, Landsea said there is "...no reliable, long-term trend up in the
frequency or intensity of tropical cyclones, either in the Atlantic or any other basin." He
added that in fact "...the evidence is quite strong and supported by the most recent credible
studies that any impact in the future from global warming upon hurricanes will likely be
quite small.”

2. IPCC is a proven fraud

WND 03 - The IPCC’s theory of global warming has been much disputed and has
been proven wrong by ice growing thicker not melting
World Net Daily, “Pollution fights 'global warming'?”, June 10, 2003, http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?
ARTICLE_ID=32992, (ZV)
“The IPCC's global-warming theory has been widely disputed. WorldNetDaily has reported that Dr.
Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia,
maintains there has been little or no warming since about 1940. In 1998, 17,000 scientists
signed a petition circulated by the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, saying, in
part, "There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide,
methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the oreseeable future, cause
catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate."
Then in January 2002, the journal Science published the findings of scientists who had
been measuring the vast West Antarctic ice sheet. The researchers found that the ice sheet
is growing thicker, not melting. The journal Nature published similar findings by scientist Peter Doran and his
colleagues at the University of Illinois. Rather than using the U.N.'s computer models, the researchers took actual temperature
readings and discovered temperatures in the Antarctic have been getting slightly colder – not warmer – for the last 30 years. Last
September, U.S. scientists based at the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station announced that, finally, they have been able to measure
the temperature of the atmosphere 18 to 68 miles over the pole. They found it to be 68 to 86 degrees Fahrenheit colder than the
computer models used to predict global warming showed.”