And the hits just keep on coming:
following on from “Glaciergate”, where the IPCC grossly exaggerated the effects of global warming on Himalayan glaciers – backed by a reference to a WWF report – we now have “Amazongate”, where the IPCC has grossly exaggerated the effects of global warming on the Amazon rain forest.
Considering that they’ve basically admitted that they’ve been hyping and falsifying things for political purposes (as Schneider said they had to do years ago), why should the IPCC have any credibility whatsoever at this point? Time to disband it.
Ah, but rest assured that despite the data manipulation, the shoddy computer code, the tampering with the peer review process, the bungled handling of glacier and now Amazon data, AGW is “settled science.”
And that damned flying pig just took a dump on my car!
Just because the institutions, the scientists involved, the data used, the measurement devices used to get the data, and the basic numbers in their reports get transposed and falsified, that doesn’t undermine the basic science behind AGW.
Sarcasm tags didn’t pick up in my post.
No reaction to this yet on realclimate, so likely no trolling here today/tonight.
If you use the pointy brackets, the browser tries to parse them as HTML. You can fake up pointy brackets by typing < and > (I used a similar entity hack to make the code show here, in case anybody’s wondering).
Or use square brackets or curlicue brackets or (my preferred) the colon instead, as in :facepalm:
The World Treehugger Federation has screwed up once more. Time to ask WTF….WTF?