By Dr John Happs.
Men only care for science so far as they get a living by it and that they worship even error when it affords them a subsistence.
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe. (1749-1832)
To persuade nations to cut back on their economic growth and transfer their wealth to developing countries, the UN had to persuade politicians from developed countries that their industrial carbon dioxide emissions were causing the Earth to heat up dangerously. Guilty developed nations would then be penalised financially.
Not all politicians were fooled by the UN’s claims. Canada’s former Prime Minister Stephen Harper said: “Kyoto is essentially a socialist scheme to suck money out of wealth-producing nations.”
Other politicians and the public remained blissfully unaware of the UN’s real intentions and its use of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) as its main vehicle of deception.
Politicians and the public failed to see how the pretence of reporting even-handedly on climate, using the IPCC even though a number of UN officials made no secret of the deception. The IPCC’s Dr. Hans Joachim Schellnhuber made clear:
“Either the Earth System would undergo major phase transitions as a result of unchecked human pressure on nature’s capacities and resources or a “Great Transformation” towards global sustainability would be initiated in due course. Neither transitions nor transformations will be manageable without novel forms of global governance and markets… “
As did Dr. Ottmar Edenhofer, co-chair of the IPCC’s Working Group III, and lead author of the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report released in 2007:
“The climate summit in Cancun —- is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War.”
UN official, Connie Hedegaard didn’t hide the fact that she cares little for what the science actually says or that action on carbon dioxide emissions would lead to more expensive electricity:
“Let’s say that science, some decades from now, said ‘we were wrong, it was not about climate’, would it not in any case have been good to do many of the things you have to do in order to combat climate change?”
And: “I think we have to realise that in the world of the 21st century for us to have the cheapest possible energy is not the answer.”
Executive Secretary to the UNFCCC, Christiana Figueres doesn’t hide the fact that the UN’s true intent was not about climate change:
“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.”
And: “Our aim is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.”
She added that democracy was getting in the way of the UN’s objectives.
Economist Dr. Dan Mitchell reflected on the main goal of Figueres and the UN as being to: “Make the world look at their right hand while they choke developed economies with their left.”
So many, from politics, the media and the public believed that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is an independent scientific body comprising the world’s best climate scientists. It isn’t and, after years of research into the IPCC, investigative journalist Donna Laframboise concludes that: “Almost nothing we’ve been told about the IPCC is actually true.”
“What most of us don’t know is that, rather than being written by a meticulous, upstanding professional in business attire, the Climate Bible is produced by a slapdash, slovenly teenager who has trouble distinguishing right from wrong.”
There are numerous examples of IPCC practices that are questionable, if not fraudulent, including:
1. The IPCC framed a problem with carbon dioxide when there is no empirical evidence to show that a problem exists.
2. IPCC scientists attempted to change climate history to show unusual 20th Century warming.
3. The IPCC claimed that over 4,000 scientists contributed to the IPCC reports. This claim is demonstrably false.
4. The IPCC produces Summaries for Policymakers (SPM) that are made available to the media and politicians. UN officials instruct authors to make the technical reports conform to the summaries even when those summaries are prepared by UN officials and often contradict what the scientists have written.
5. The IPCC claims that a large number of scientists write the IPCC reports when only a select few do and they include vested interest groups.
6. The former (supposedly neutral) IPCC Chairman Dr. Rajendra Pachauri publicly declared his bias about climate change.
7. The IPCC Summaries for Policymakers about extreme weather is more alarmist than the scientific report.
8. The IPCC claimed that global warming was increasing the habitats for mosquitoes, putting hundreds of millions of people in the tropics at risk of contracting malaria and dengue fever. This was shown to be false.
9. In 1995 Dr. Roger Pielke was invited to provide input to the IPCC chapter on climate modelling. Because he offered criticism, his material was ignored, as it was in 1992 when he was asked to review several chapters in the IPCC supplement report.
10. IPCC associates block submissions of papers critical of the anthropogenic global warming alarmism.
11. There are currently more than 1,300 peer-reviewed papers that are skeptical of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming claims. The IPCC ignored or marginalised these.
12. The IPCC claims to use only peer-reviewed published literature when it clearly does no such thing.
13. Evidence is clear that temperature rises before atmospheric carbon dioxide level increases. The IPCC ignores this fact.
14. The IPCC ignores data showing that carbon dioxide is a minor greenhouse gas and has never driven global temperature at any time over the last 500 million years.
15. Dr. Myles Allen, an IPCC Lead Author, admitted that the climate computer models are exaggerating warming.
16. A senior IPCC scientist gave an assurance of no input from Non Governmental Organisations (NGO’s) into IPCC reports. This assurance proved false.
17. IPCC raw temperature data were withheld by the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit and then “lost.”
18. IPCC personnel claimed the Earth is “running a fever” when there has been little or no global warming for at least the last 20 years.
19. The IPCC essentially ignores or plays down the large volume of literature that points to the sun as being a major driver of climate change.
20. IPCC scientists admitted that computer predictions of climate change are of limited value. IPCC Lead Author Dr. Kevin Trenberth admitted:
“There are no (climate) predictions by IPCC at all. And there never have been”. Instead, there are only “what if” projections of future climate that correspond to certain emissions scenarios.”
Senior IPCC scientist Dr. Jim Renwick agreed, saying:
“In climate research and modelling, we should recognise that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system and therefore that long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.”
Despite such admissions, the IPCC continue to make computer model climate predictions that are more dramatic than ever yet none of their alarmist predictions have been correct.
Over 100 examples of questionable IPCC behaviour can be located at:
After following up the links provided, the reader can decide if the activities of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) represent carelessness or deliberate fraud.
This is an extract from a longer article. For more examples of cheating in science see: https://papundits.wordpress.com/2021/03/15/cheating-in-science-is-nothing-new-is-climate-fraud-the-most-blatant-example/
Dr. John Happs M.Sc.1st Class; D.Phil. John has an academic background in the geosciences with special interests in climate, and paleoclimate. He has been a science educator at several universities in Australia and overseas and was President of the Western Australian Skeptics for 25 years.