re: #129 Charles

And the list of absolutely confirmed and exhaustively researched evidence in the IPCC’s AR4 documents amounts to more than 3,000 pages, with many thousands of citations for scientific papers and studies.

You’re promoting nonsense to suggest that the minuscule number of problems found are cause for significant doubt, in comparison to the vast amount of valid evidence.

I respectfully disagree; I am referring to major errors that appear in the far shorter and influential synthesis report under the direct responsibility of the IPCC Chair Dr RK Pachauri. They apply to the most alarming predictions dealing with crucial regions that have become “poster issues” to-wit, the Amazon, the Himalayan Glaciers and Africa. All false, all based upon advocacy reports, not peer reviewed science.

Also, I do not rely on the media for my information, they are playing catch up on this matter, as always. I can document the flaws I am talking about in the actual IPCC AR4.

Also, note that I have changed my opinion. Before this I too upheld the IPCC AR4 as a credible document. I now discover that I was mistaken.