If IPCC authors think that it’s important to improve the measurement of some variable, should they say so in an IPCC report?
You’d think that this would be exactly the sort of recommendation that policy makers would appreciate in an assessment report. For example, maybe IPCC scientists could have observed that there was in reality no “Great Dying of Thermometers” and recommended that GHCN collect data from the missing but undead thermometers. Or observed (if this was in fact true) that some station data was encumbered by confidentiality agreements and called upon governments of the world to free this elementary data.
Surely there would have been a ready audience for this sort of recommendation. And yet AR4 was strangely silent on this sort of practical recommendation. We get a fleeting glimpse into IPCC reasoning in a Climategate letter.
On May 5, 2005 (517. 1115294935.txt), while preparing for a conference in…
View original post 148 more words