Hacker News Reader

Comment by vannevar | Hacker News Reader

The errors cited are absolutely trivial. They are in vague statements like "there are suggestions that" and "it is more likely than not". The overall conclusion of the IPCC was that "there is no clear trend in the annual numbers of tropical cyclones." Far from contradicting the IPCC, the cited study confirms its conclusion.

View on HN

In 2005, the National Hurricane Center's chief scientist Chris Landsea resigned his post in protest at the treatment of the subject by Trenberth.

"I personally cannot in good faith continue to contribute to a process that I view as both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound. As the IPCC leadership has seen no wrong in Dr. Trenberth’s actions and have retained him as a Lead Author for the AR4, I have decided to no longer participate in the IPCC AR4."

Do you think that's absolutely trivial as well?

Not to contradict your statement, but this is an often misinterpreted letter. If you read the letter in its entirety, it is very clear that Landsea is talking about the very specific issue of hurricanes and global warming. He mentions global warming several times and never once questions the reality of global warming. It certainly seems to me like he's just taking global warming as a given. The reason he gives for resigning is:

"My view is that when people identify themselves as being associated with the IPCC and then make pronouncements far outside current scientific understandings that this will harm the credibility of climate change science and will in the longer term diminish our role in public policy."

In other words, he thinks global warming science should influence policy debate. In this instance, he feels the IPCC made a statement it shouldn't have, and it will hinder future efforts to affect policy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com