I am going to be upfront about my
stance before you dive into this article so you can gauge my level of
bias and
take the writing below with whatever level of salt you feel necessary.
Taking a neutral
stance at this point on rehashed work from «NIPCC» (Fred Singer and friends), well known for serial, serious errors in overall interpretation, analysis and communication of the science and transparent but largely unexamined ideological
bias at play in their playground «reports» — never mind suggesting that this kind of effort «competes» with the work of the world's climate scientists and the 2,500 multidisciplinary specialists contributing to IPCC reports combined with the tens of thousands of additional scientists and many others who raise real questions that result from reading, reviewing, evaluating and evolving the information in both IPCC summaries and domestic science and discussion of the science, knowledgeably and in good faith and with open identification of the nature of the social and political issues — is just not credible.