1. After I volunteered for the unpaid job of Expert Reviewer for the manuscript for IPCC AR6 (the latest version of the IPCC’s Climate Assessment Report), the IPCC reviewed my record of peer-reviewed publications in the literature of global warming climatology and on this basis accepted my offer. When I read the manuscript I noticed that it overlooked a glaring error in the argument made by an IPCC climate model. This was that the runs of such a model conveyed nil infomation gain to a would-be regulator of the outcomes of the events of the future for Earth’s climate system, precluding regulation of this system by a would-be regulator of it. On these grounds, I advised against the publication of this manuscript. Without addressing the issue I had raised, the IPCC ignored me and published the faulty manuscript. My appeals to the Chair of the IPCC and Chief Statistician of the United Nations were to no avail.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.