Climate Professor Quits Biased Global Warming IPCC

Written by De Telegraaf

Dutch Professor Richard Tol has resigned from the Climate Panel of the UN. Professor Tol disagrees with the biased negative conclusions of the latest UN climate report. The consequences of climate change are being systematically over-estimated, according to him. 

Professor Tol“The Panel is directed from within the environment lobby and not from within the science.”
 
The UN IPCC presented its fifth climate report in Yokohama at the end of last month. The IPCC says if there are no changes in world-wide climate policies then the chance of calling a halt to further warming of the earth will be lost, says  the report’s most important conclusion and warning.
 
But, according to Professor of Climate Economy Tol, the tone of the report is grossly “alarming and apocalyptic”. The consequences of climate change are being over-estimated. “This over-estimation is encouraged by the self-selection of authors and references within the Panel” Tol told the Belgian newspaper De Morgen.
 
There are top scientists in the UN IPCC, but there are nonetheless many mediocre researchers. Besides which there are a number of people who have the right political connections. The organisation is directed and controlled by people who benefit from climate policy. The UN IPCC is directed from within the environmental lobby and not from within the science.”
 
Consequently Professor Tol has resigned from the Panel with immediate effect. He has been dissatisfied for a long time. According to Tol two official investigations have indicated that there is systematic over-estimation of the consequences of climate change within the UN’s IPCC.
 
—————————-
Translated from Dutch to English by Hans Schreuder. Below is the original Dutch article from:

 

Tags: , , , ,

Trackback from your site.

Comments (9)

  • Avatar

    Robert

    |

    The climate change debate needs to understand the importance of two facts 1. The Sun 2. Water Vapour has on climate
    The IPPC has a politcal and environmental agenda not scientific. The reports hence are bias to the environmental movement and its interests. Carbon credits and reducing the CO2 emissions will not change tomorrows weather. Alternative energy will be good is having cleaner air and water though will not create the change in the future weather patterns which a far too complex and beyond our control. We need more science and less environmental politics!

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Claudius Denk

    |

    [quote name=”ffkling”]Who is Professor Tol,[/quote]Try using a search engine.[quote name=”ffkling”] and why should anyone take notice of a single outlier.[/quote]You mean like a bristol cone pine?

    Reply

  • Avatar

    ffkling

    |

    Who is Professor Tol, and why should anyone take notice of a single outlier. Sounds to me that the Climate Change denialists will hang onto damn near anything.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Pat Obar

    |

    [quote name=”Heinz”][b]If client change it not real – the consequence of pro climate change policy good for mankind in many ways. If client change is real, consequences would be apocalyptic. The logic thing to do is to play the save card..?[/b][/quote]
    Please explain how Carbon Credits in any way benfit mankind. Please show how increases in atmospheric CO2 do anything except benfit mankind.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Lt. Robert K Powell GDO ret.

    |

    Professor Tol
    Thank you for your work, and having the courage to uphold ethical standards. As a Military Analyst, and following the subject it has never been about science. For your use, a powerpoint of 5 slides for your viewing. This from U.S. perspective.
    See: http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/33671517
    Kindest to you all, wherever you may be
    Lt. Powell

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Doug  Cotton

    |

    Wasting $100,000,000,000 a year is “good for mankind” is it? Spending it on humanitarian aid might be better.

    Don’t you get it? Sound, valid physics can be used to prove carbon dioxide cools, but by less than 0.1 degree.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Heinz

    |

    [b]If client change it not real – the consequence of pro climate change policy good for mankind in many ways. If client change is real, consequences would be apocalyptic. The logic thing to do is to play the save card..?[/b]

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Doug  Cotton

    |

    The [url=http://www.climate-change-theory.com/cover-front-back.jpg]bells[/url] are starting to Tol.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Mark

    |

    Another prominent scientist resigns.

    Reply

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.