The UN IPCC Species Con: UN report meddled with by politicians/bureaucrats ‘to muster only one kind of evidence, the kind that promotes UN environmental treaties’
By Donna LaFramboise
Once again, the ‘world’s leading scientists’ provide cover for UN machinations.
Here we ago again. For some time, I’ve warned that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is a template, that the United Nations is up to the same tricks elsewhere.
Today, in Paris, an IPCC clone known as the IPBES – the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services – will announce the completion of an 1,800-page report.
Jonathan Watts, the UK Guardian‘s global environment editor, has already told us everything we need to know about this ‘IPCC for Nature‘.
Under the headline Biodiversity crisis is about to put humanity at risk, UN scientists to warn, he insists this report was written by “The world’s leading scientists.” Funny, that’s how compliant, gullible journalists described IPCC personnel. For years and years. Until I began to notice that some of those involved were graduate students in their 20s.
Watts further tells us that:
The final wording of the summary for policymakers is being finalised in Paris by a gathering of experts and government representatives before the launch on Monday, but the overall message is already clear… [bold added by me]
In other words, as happens at the IPCC, scientists are recruited to write a report. Afterward, they draft a summary known as the Summary for Policymakers (SPM). Then politicians and bureaucrats representing national governments attend a plenary meeting where the summary gets examined line-by-line and rewritten.
Fairy tales tell of turning straw into gold. The UN takes scientific summaries and transforms them into politically acceptable straw. The resulting document, which will be solemnly released today, is what a roomful of political operatives have all agreed to say out loud.
But it gets worse. Over the next few weeks, the text being summarized – the underlying, ostensibly scientific document – will also get changed.
That’s not how things normally work, of course. Summaries are supposed to be accurate reflections of longer documents. At the UN, they represent an opportunity to alter those documents, to make them fall into line.
No need to take my word for it. This is standard IPCC operating procedure, and is openly admitted in a 56-page guide to how the IPBES operates.
Imagine, for a moment, executives at a television station examining the script of an investigative news show line-by-line. Imagine them re-writing that text at the behest of major advertisers, and in accordance with various political sensitivities. Would the end result be trustworthy?
Robert Watson, who chaired the IPCC from 1997 to 2002, now leads the IPBES. His online biography, over at the University of East Anglia, tell us he is a ‘UN Champion of the World for Science and Innovation.’
When the IPBES was established in 2010, we were informed point blank that its purpose was “to spearhead the battle against the destruction of the natural world.”
In other words, there’s all sorts of deception here. This is no sober scientific body, which examines multiple perspectives, and considers alternative hypotheses. The job of the IPBES is to muster only one kind of evidence, the kind that promotes UN environmental treaties.
That’s how the United Nations works, folks. Machinations in the shadows. Camouflaging its political aspirations by dressing them up in 1,800 pages of scientific clothing.
If what you’ve just read is helpful or useful
please support this blog
- Guardian article from 2010: UN’s ‘IPCC for nature’ to fight back against destruction of natural world(backed up here)
- Jonathan Watt’s article from a few days ago, Biodiversity crisis is about to put humanity at risk, UN scientists to warn
- my previous commentary: 3 Things Scientists Need to Know About the IPCC
- The Anti-Democratic United Nations
- International Law: Stealing Our Freedom
- Meet the IPCC’s Youngest Lead Author: At the age of 25, Richard Klein became an IPCC lead author. He held a Masters degree, and had spent a year working for Greenpeace.
- An Even Younger Senior Author: If climate change is the biggest challenge facing humanity, why have kids filled senior IPCC roles for the past 15 years?
- The Strange Case of Sari Kovats: How does someone who hasn’t yet earned their doctorate get nominated by their own government for IPCC duty multiple times?
- Lead Author Lacked a Master’s Degree: It’s puzzling how someone who joined the IPCC a decade prior to receiving her PhD could possibly have been considered one of the world’s top scientists.