They all admit the IPCC is flawed and in need of an overhaul, yet they still insist the science is correct. Go figure. That’s pure rubbish, of course. Bad process = bad product.
It sounds just like the National Academy of Sciences reaching the conclusion that Michael Mann’s hockey stick science had no value, but his answer was still correct.Here are the excerpts from some of the leading online papers in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. (I’ve also added some UK links below, h/t: http://thegwpf.org/
SÜDDEUTSCHE ZEITUNG in Germany (a favorite of Stefan Rahmstorf) writes:
Obligation to be more open
An examination of the IPCC reveals: The IPCC has to change the way it works. Yet, there’s no basis for the foaming attacks on its results.
DER STANDARD in Austria writes:
In the expert team’s assessment, they recommend formulating stricter scientific guidelines for handling data on climate change. Forecasts and projections should be made only based on solid scientific evidence.
Sounds good. But if that were to be implemented, the entire IPCC 4AR would be reduced to only 2 pages: a front and back cover.
DER SPIEGEL in Germany writes:
Consequence of the crisis: Experts urge an overhaul of the UN IPCC. They harshly criticised the work of the leadership. Not only the leadership, but also the scientific work of the climate panel is in need of reform.
DIE ZEIT in Germany writes:
IPCC to be a reform project
Flawed data, hacked e-mails: The doubts about the IPCC were enormous. Now the UN draws a conclusion: Its work was correct, but its credibilty must be strengthened.
DIE WELT in Germany writes:
The IPCC which has been under fire because of series of follies has to be comprehensively reformed in order to remove doubts about its credibility. A report presented by the UN-appointed experts has reached the conclusion that a ‘fundamental reform’ of the IPCC is needed in order for it to strengthen its scientific standards and organisation.
NZZ in Zurich has a more lengthy piece, and writes:
The Interacademy Council (IAC) said critics were only partially right. In a report presented to the UN in NewYork on Monday, the IPCC was attested as having done, on the whole, good work. But it is criticised that its management structures and public relations work of the IPCC did not fulfill the requirements of today.
From the UK, h/t : http://thegwpf.org/
The Sun: UN ‘lacks Solid Evidence’ in Climate Warnings
Daily Express: Climate Change Lies Are Exposed
BBC News: Stricter controls urged for the UN’s climate body
The Times: Climate chief under pressure to quit after report on glacier blunder
The Guardian: Rajendra Pachauri, head of UN climate change body, under pressure to resign
The Independent: IPCC feels the heat as it is told to get its facts right about global warming