Bias and concealment in the IPCC process: The "Hockey-stick" affair and its implications

12Citations
Citations of this article
13Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

The climatic "hockey stick" hypothesis has systemic problems. I review how the IPCC came to adopt the "hockey stick" as scientific evidence of human interference with the climate. I report also on independent peer reviewed studies of the "hockey stick" that were instigated by the US House of Representatives in 2006, and which comprehensively invalidated it. The "divergence" problem and the selective and unreliable nature of tree-ring reconstructions are discussed, as is the unsatisfactory review process of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report that ignored the invalidation of the "hockey stick". The error found recently in the GISS temperature series is also noted. It is concluded that the IPCC has neither the structure nor the necessary independence and supervision of its processes to be acceptable as the monopoly authority on climate science. Suggestions are made as to how the IPCC could improve its procedures towards producing reports and recommendations that are more scientifically sound.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Holland, D. (2007). Bias and concealment in the IPCC process: The “Hockey-stick” affair and its implications. Energy and Environment. SAGE Publications Inc. https://doi.org/10.1260/095830507782616788

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free