Rawls, A

---

<h1 class="print-title" style=" margin-bottom: .2em;">IPCC Leaked Draft Prompts New Internet Flap</h1>

<div class="dek" style=" font-style: italic; margin-bottom: .5em;">The beleaguered international scientific body is back in the news after skeptics post a draft report.</div>

By <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/authors/kate-sheppard" rel="author">Kate Sheppard</a> | Sat Dec. 15, 2012 3:08 AM PST

On Thursday, someone <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/14/leaked-ipcc-report_n_2300558.html">posted part</a> [1] of a draft version of the forthcoming report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) online, prompting a new round of internet freak-out over the report and the panel.

The IPCC's <a href="http://www.ipcc-wg2.gov/AR5/ar5.html">fifth assessment report</a> [2] on climate change—known as AR5—is slated for release starting in 2013. A blogger at the website <a href="http://www.stopgreensuicide.com/">Stop Green Suicide</a> [3] posted the draft of Working Group 1's portion of the report, which deals with the physical science of climate change, and it was reposted at the popular skeptic blog <a href="http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/12/13/ipcc-ar5-draft-leaked-contains-game-changing-admission-of-enhanced-solar-forcing/">Watts Up With That</a> [4]. The poster was a guy by the name of <a href="http://www.blogger.com/profile/18106800937399442588">Alec Rawls</a> [5], who, in addition to writing about how solar activity is causing global warming, is also the <a href="http://www.juliansanchez.com/2003/01/16/like-father-like-son-not-quite/">son of the late philosopher John Rawls</a> [6] and <a href="http://www.crescentofbetrayal.com/">the author of a book</a> [7] about how a "terrorist memorial mosque" being built near the site of the Flight 93 memorial in Pennsylvania.

Rawls signed up to be a reviewer for the draft report, which is <a href="http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2006/05/09/you-too-can-be-a-leading-clima/">really easy to do</a> [8]. Basically all you have to do is ask to see a draft and agree that you won't release it. (Seems like that last part didn't work very well here.)

Rawls says the release was justified because a lot of the scientists working on it work at public institutions, and the IPCC shouldn't be allowed to work in secret:

<blockquote>So may we please see this "science" on the basis of which our existing energy infrastructure is to be ripped out in favor of non-existent “green” energy? The only reason for secrecy in the first place is to enhance the UN’s political control over a scientific story line that is aimed explicitly at policy makers. Thus the drafts ought to fall within the reach of the Freedom of Information Act.</blockquote>

Rawls believes that the draft includes a "game-changing admission" that supports the argument that <a href="http://www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm">solar forcing</a> [9]—i.e., the sun—is causing the planet to warm, not carbon dioxide. Those claims about what the new report have been pretty soundly debunked <a href="http://skepticalscience.com/ipcc-draft-leak-global-warming-not-solar.html">here</a> [10] and <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2012/12/13/major-ipcc-report-draft-leaked-then-cherry-picked-climate-sceptics">here</a> [11].

As you can imagine, skeptics on the internet have gone bonkers over this, much like they did over the 2009 <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2011/04/history-of-climategate">"Climategate" emails</a> [12]. But as with that incident, they're focusing in on a cherry-picked line that ignores everything else in the draft report.

The IPCC <a href="https://www.motherjones.com/files/ipccstatement.pdf">issued statement</a> [13] calling the release "unauthorized and premature," and warned that it "may lead to confusion because the text will necessarily change in some respects once all the review comments have been addressed." They did not comment on the contents of the draft report, other than noting that all drafts are "works in progress."

Like any report, it's not done until it's done, and there are likely to be more changes before it is officially released next year. Yet the incident has rekindled complaints about the IPCC's process. Andy Revkin has a good run down of <a href="http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/13/leak-of-climate-panel-drafts-speaks-to-need-for-new-process/?ref=energy-environment">those complaints</a> [14], which include concerns about fixing errors and about how different working groups operate. I'll also note that while skeptics love to trash the IPCC as "alarmist," it has also been flagged for <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2012/12/report-ipcc-underestimating-climate-threat">consistently underestimating</a> [15] climate impacts. Creating these reports involves hundreds of scientific papers, hundreds of scientists, and the review of governments, most of them working on a voluntary basis. It's almost inevitable that it would face some challenges.

Peter Frumhoff, director of science and policy at the Union of Concerned Scientists, summed up the latest flap well on Friday: "The IPCC is the most heavily scrutinized scientific body in the world. It's unfortunate, but not unexpected, that someone would abuse its peer review process. This won’t be the last attempt to undermine the IPCC."

</div>

<div class="print-source_url">Source URL: <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2012/12/ipcc-leaked-draft-prompts-new-internet-flap">http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2012/12/ipcc-leaked-draft-prompts-new-internet-flap</a></div>

Links:

[1] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/14/leaked-ipcc-report_n_2300558.html

[2] http://www.ipcc-wg2.gov/AR5/ar5.html

[3] http://www.stopgreensuicide.com/

[4] http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/12/13/ipcc-ar5-draft-leaked-contains-game-changing-admission-of-enhanced-solar-forcing/

[5] http://www.blogger.com/profile/18106800937399442588

[6] http://www.juliansanchez.com/2003/01/16/like-father-like-son-not-quite/

[7] http://www.crescentofbetrayal.com/

[8] http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2006/05/09/you-too-can-be-a-leading-clima/

[9] http://www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm

[10] http://skepticalscience.com/ipcc-draft-leak-global-warming-not-solar.html

[11] http://www.desmogblog.com/2012/12/13/major-ipcc-report-draft-leaked-then-cherry-picked-climate-sceptics

[12] http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2011/04/history-of-climategate

[13] https://www.motherjones.com/files/ipccstatement.pdf

[14] http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/13/leak-of-climate-panel-drafts-speaks-to-need-for-new-process/?ref=energy-environment

[15] http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2012/12/report-ipcc-underestimating-climate-threat

</div>

===

Here is a short bio I sent to press people covering the Flight 93 memorial debacle. My training is as an economist. I was in the PhD program in economics at Stanford until my research led me more towards moral theory and constitutional law, at which point I dropped the program and started working on my own. I was writing a book on republicanism (the system of liberty under law) for World Ahead Publishing when I discovered that the Flight 93 memorial was going to be a terrorist memorial mosque. World Ahead agreed to first publish my book about this rehijacking of Flight 93 (Crescent of Betrayal, temporarily available for free download at <a href="http://www.CrescentOfBetrayal.com">CrescentOfBetrayal.com</a>). This is not my first venture into journalism. Over the years I have been a writer, opinions editor, and advisor for Stanford’s conservative campus newspaper The Stanford Review, and am currently on the Review’s board of directors.

<a href="http://www.rawls.org/Earth_Day_2030.htm">http://www.rawls.org/Earth_Day_2030.htm</a>  just made up quotes?

gonzo gone wrong?

“It looked right at me! It looked right at me!” one protester cried over and over as she huddled the foyer of the Fairmont hotel. Police were nonplussed, but expressed relief that at least the “die in” was short lived. Similar panic attacks struck protestors in other North American and European cities. No other segment of society seems to have been affected. A spokesman for the Centers for Disease Control said that the “panic phenomenon” would be monitored. “On the plus side,” he joked, “I don’t think we’ll be seeing any more street-rallies from the Al Qaeda remnant.”

At the new United Nation complex in Harare, Zimbabwe, “contrarian” climatologist Stephen Schneider sounded a warning note. “As I have been saying since the 1970’s, the cause of global cooling is human economic activity. If we want to counteract global cooling, economic activity must be drastically curtailed. Demi-Ra just enables industrial society to proceed apace with its destructive impact.” A reporter reminded Dr. Schneider that from 1980 to 2010, when global temperatures were rising, Dr. Schneider, then at Stanford University, had claimed that human activity was causing global warming, and therefore needed to be curtailed. “As you can see,” Dr. Schneider answered, “I have been perfectly consistent.”

Also at the United Nation news conference was Dr. Paul Ehrlich, who declared that Demi-Ra would cause mass starvation by 2040. “It will lengthen the growing season in temperate regions,” Ehrlich predicted. “The resulting increase in food production will create population growth. Soon there won’t be enough food for the increased population and everyone will die.” A reporter reminded Dr. Ehrlich that he had predicted mass starvation by the mid 1970’s, the mid 80’s, the mid 90’s, by 2010, by 2020 and by 2030. “That is not consistent enough for you?” Dr. Ehrlich parried, receiving a sharp nod of approval from Dr. Schneider.

The one nation that actually is starving is Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe’s Dictator for Life, Kojo Annan, owns the entire country and insists that “I won’t allow people to steal from me by growing food on my property and eating it.” Zimbabwe’s population is down to 2 million, from 12 million in the year 2000. The country’s problems are compounded by the fact that Venezuela, when it pulled out of the United Nations last month (prompting the name change to United Nation), also ended its oil subsidies to Zimbabwe. Without Venezuelan oil, Zimbabwe’s downward population trend is expected to continue. “That is a good thing,” suggested Dr. Ehrlich, explaining that “the more people who starve today, the less competition there will be for food tomorrow.”

Russia, on the other hand, seems to be looking forward to being well fed—and warm—in the present. Each nation gets to decide where its allotment of extra sunlight will be directed. The Russian plan is to warm Russian cities during the long Russian winter, then in spring and fall, to create extended growing seasons in selected farming areas. Dry regions like Mongolia and the Western United States are planning to concentrate much of their Demi-Ra allotment onto fields of solar-electric generating panels. Countries can also trade their allotments on the open market.

The Demi-Ra company, a private corporation regulated by the United States government, will receive 10% of the market value of each country’s allotment in perpetuity. “If they don’t give us our cut, they don’t get the sunlight,” said Demi-Ra CEO Michael Petras, in attendance at the Vandenberg countdown. “Hey, we ought to be getting more,” he added unapologetically. “The government thought we needed to give up 90% to grease the international wheels. That’s a LOT!” Company President Aman Verjee, also in attendance agreed that: “The government drove a hard bargain, but it was still a no-brainer.”  “Even at 10%, the margins are HUGE,” Petras roared, knocking Verjee backwards. “Once we looked at Dr. Michaels’ plans and started running the numbers, it was just a matter of getting congressional approval. Everyone with a dollar wanted in.”