Blogroll

Climate Change

Blog Archive

Counters




Google Hit Counter

A comment

Posted by Richard Friday, July 02, 2010

... on the Monbiot blog:

Monbiot in his previous article:

The ironies of this episode are manifold, but the most obvious is this: that North's story – and the Sunday Times's rewritten account – purported to expose inaccuracy, misrepresentation and falsehood on the part of the IPCC. Now that the IPCC has been vindicated, its accusers, North first among them, are exposed for peddling inaccuracy, misrepresentation and falsehood. Ashes to ashes, toast to toast.

Monbiot today:

There is no doubt that the IPCC made a mistake. Sourcing its information on the Amazon to a report by the green group WWF rather than the substantial peer-reviewed literature on the subject, was a bizarre and silly thing to do.
...
It is also true that nowhere in the peer-reviewed literature is there a specific statement that "up to 40% of the Amazonian forests could react drastically to even a slight reduction in precipitation". This figure was taken from the WWF report and it shouldn't have been".

One can be gracious in defeat, and humble in victory. On the contrary, one can be George Monbiot.
And where, incidentally, does that put The Sunday Times retraction?

Moonbat thread