For Release: January
Contact: David Almasi at (202) 543-4110 x11 or e-mail email@example.com
Statement of National
Center for Public Policy Research President Amy Ridenour on What the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Must Do in the Wake of
Washington, D.C.: Statement of National Center
for Public Policy Research president Amy Ridenour on what the IPCC must do in
wake of unfolding scandals:
In the wake of admissions the
IPCC knew all along it was putting bogus science in its 2007 Assessment
Report, that the false prediction was included specifically for its "impact
on policymakers and politicians," and that this allegedly was
covered up as long as it was because the IPCC chairman was raising money for
his personal pursuits based on the prediction, the IPCC must immediately take
three steps to restore its credibility. If it does not, the Obama
Administration should use its influence to have it shut down.
To restore its credibility, the IPCC should:
1) Return its half of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize and replace its current
2) Adopt and enforce a strict conflict-of-interest policy;
3) Adopt an uncompromising transparency policy, which includes the release of
all data, all emails, all meeting minutes, all drafts and all other
documentation related to the development of assessment reports and all other
policy pronouncements, in the past and from this date forward.
Step one would signal to the world that the IPCC is serious about reform.
Step two would reduce, though not eliminate, the temptation faced by IPCC
personnel to tailor conclusions to moneymaking, career or fundraising
opportunities for themselves or affiliated businesses or institutions.
Step three would be a constant reminder to IPCC personnel that their work
genuinely will be peer-reviewed, in a universal sense, which is as it should
be given the gravity of the IPCC's work.
Politicians relying upon IPCC recommendations are considering policies that
would limit the access of billions of people to low-cost energy in an effort
to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. This is a grave step that should be
undertaken only if the alternative is worse. As many have considered the IPCC
to be the institution that can answer that question, given the gravity of
these circumstances, no level of transparency and ethics can be too high.
Global warming believers and "skeptics" do not often agree, but
this is a subject upon which we should be able to reach a true consensus. No
one benefits when the IPCC knowingly publishes bogus science.
The National Center for
Public Policy Research (http://www.nationalcenter.org)
is a non-partisan educational foundation based in Washington, DC. It receives
the vast majority of its funding from hundreds of thousands of individual
donors; and receives less than one percent of its funding from corporate
Us | What's
New | Read
Our Blog | Home
501 Capitol Court, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20002
Fax (202) 543-5975