IAC Review of IPCC: Corruption of Science

The InterAcademy Council (IAC) Review is summarized in the Opening Statement by Harold Shapiro as follows:

• Overall, IPCC’s assessment process has been a success and served society well.
• We were asked by the Secretary-General and the IPCC Chair to focus on the processes and procedures of the IPCC, and to make recommendations aimed at strengthening the process by which future climate assessments are managed and prepared.
• We were not asked to re-referee the last IPCC assessment or to review the basic science of human-caused climate change.

IAC thus gives humankind yet another review of the IPCC process, without any form of review of the basic science.

But if the basic science is wrong, which it seems to be, it does not matter if certain formalities of IPCC processes are correct or not. IAC states that irrespective of the science presented by IPCC (= global warming by CO2 = alarm), whether it is correct or not, IPCC has been a success.

To proclaim success without assessment of the science, is only possible under the condition that IPCC assessments are not based on science, only politics. Nevertheless, IAC gives praise to IPCC, as if IPCC assessments in fact are based on science:

• The assessments have put IPCC on the world stage, raised public awareness of climate change, and driven policymakers to consider options for responding to climate change. Indeed, these were among the reasons IPCC was awarded a share of the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007.
  

IAC thus builds on a contradiction: Either IAC understands this, but seeks deliberately to fool the public, or IAC does not see the contradiction at all. In either case it signifies corruption of science into only politics, which cannot "serve society well".