Canada Free Press

By Dr. Tim Ball  Monday, September 20, 2010

Most people have no idea what the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) actually studies. They believe their reports are complete reports of climate change. This misconception is mostly because the IPCC arranged it and does little to correct it.  In fact, they only look at that portion of climate change caused by humans. Here’s how they limit their study.

“The definition of climate change the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), in its Article 1, defines climate change as: ‘a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods’. The UNFCCC thus makes a distinction between climate change attributable to human activities altering the atmospheric composition, and climate variability attributable to natural causes.”

The problem is you cannot determine the human portion of climate change if you don’t know how much it changes naturally – and we don’t. The IPCC assumes humans cause most of the changes that are occurring and set out to prove that is true….([1] Full Story)

__________
Note by folc.ca: Those few paragraphs provide a sketch of research methods that are not pretty. The commonly used designation for such research methods is “[2] advocacy research“.  Advocacy research is often used in the soft sciences, such as in sociology, where wrong conclusion are routinely drawn by making projections to general circumstances and basing those projections on desired results that were manufactured through selective study samples and skewed or invented data, while excluding all data that tend to counter or disprove a desired objective.

[3] Advocacy research is of course shoddy, even unethical and outright fraudulent when it is done on purpose.  Still, the IPCC and its supporters commonly engage in it apparently for the simple reason that, for the purpose of social engineering on a global scale, they attempt to subvert the hard sciences that come into play in credible climate research.

[4] It has been known for a good number of years that the IPCC is heavily involved in selecting and promoting advocacy research. The enormous extent of the IPCC’s involvement in the instigation and promotion of such shoddy research practices did not come into general public view until the revelations came to light that surfaced in the course of [5] the climategate scandal in November of 2009 and through [6] the attempts by various review committees at whitewashing the culpability of the main organizations and players involved in climate-related advocacy research.