'The academy invited the former and current science advisers to the U.S. presidents to a symposium. All of the attendants turned out to be Democrats who served for Democrats, starting from Frank Press who served for Jimmy Carter'
Gingrich: 'And I'd say to NAS don't assume that a vote by renowned scientists is necessarily true
Rebuttal: 'Believe it or not, the NAS does not opine on science. NAS does not pass judgment on scientific issues. Indeed, there is no mechanism to do so. The NAS has an affiliate called National Research Council...produces reports of varying quality that represent consensus views of the panels'
NAS' NRC: 'Our climate specialists assist federal, regional, and international agencies with development of climate change policy'
Climatologist Pielke Sr. Slams: 'It is clear that the NRC has elected to be an advocate on a particular perspective with respect to climate, and the human role, rather than serving as a facilitator which permits the assessment of the diversity of scientifically supported viewpoints on this issue'
Report 'blatantly political': NAS report is 'designed to be used by unelected regulators as scientific cover for what our legislature refuses to do, which is to enact expensive and intrusive restrictions on emissions of Co2' -- Several authors are environmental activists, and the National Academies' President, Ralph Cicerone, has been on a mission to demonize carbon dioxide for decades'
'Prior to publishing the NAS/NRC report, 19 of 23 made statements claiming global warming is a human induced problem and/or we need to take action to reduce CO2. That means 83% of panel was clearly and obviously biased before being selected. To claim that a report from such a small panel, comprised primarily of non-climate scientists and environmental activists, is objective and scientifically authoritative is a joke'
Many of the world’s leading models are now projecting warming rates that most scientists, including the modelmakers themselves, believe are implausibly fast. In advance of the U.N. report, scientists have scrambled to understand what went wrong and how to turn the models, which in other respects are more powerful and trustworthy than their predecessors, into useful guidance for policymakers. ... Climate models used by next month’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report project more warming over an 1850–1900 baseline than those in a 2013 report. Scientists are using recent observed warming to rein them in.