Essay: “The Evolution of International Cooperation in Climate Science”
The essay describes the success of IPCC through its history and evolution, yet it unwittingly reveals everything that’s wrong with the organization from the perspective of science.
From the essay:
As political scientist Clark Miller (2001, 171, passim) has explained, American foreign policy-makers believed the scientific enterprise was ‘intertwined with the pursuit of a free, stable, and prosperous world order.”
It was not just that gathering knowledge gave a handy excuse for creating international organizations. It’s goals from the onset were to reinforce the ideals and methods of democracy.
Thanks for the link – I´m only one page into it and I love it. 🙂
As you say, it seem to “unwittingly reveals everything that’s wrong with the organization from the perspective of science”
A favorite so far:
“The IPCC, although exceptional in the scope of its mission and effort, is not unique in its methods and outcome. In particular, a requirement for consensus, and the procedures and norms that make it workable, are found in the decision-making of many other international regimes that employ scientific research to address environmental problems.”
“…intertwined with the pursuit of a free, stable, and prosperous world order.”
Superman comic political vision meets Jerry Lewis science!
Kind of goes with that photo of Al and Pachauri getting their Oslo Emmies in lieu of a real prize for actually knowing and doing stuff. Talk about cheesy and creepy.
What’s amazing is that it is the educated class which gobbles this tripe with a very big spoon. (Though a glance at any edition of Salon or the HuffPo indicates that “educated” has taken on a new meaning, more to do with snobbery and self-loathing than knowing.)
Sepp Blatter for next IPCC chairman! (Unless Berlusconi is available, of course.)
What do you think about this paragraph:
“All the organizational work for weather prediction did little to connect the scattered specialists in diverse fields who took an interest in climate change. A better chance came in the mid 1950s, when a small band of scientists got together to push international cooperation to a higher level in all areas of geophysics. They aimed to coordinate their data gathering and—no less important—to persuade their governments to spend an extra billion or so dollars on research. The result was the International Geophysical Year (IGY) of 1957–58.”
Now consider this; the “extra billion or so dollars on research” is in 1957 dollars, factor in inflation and multiply that number by the number of countries signed on as signatories to the concept; then further multiply this by about 50 years. And the left complains about the 10s of millions in fossil fuel influence; it would be hilarious if it weren’t so myopic, these people are tragically misinformed relative to governmental influence peddling using big money that could only a government could spend on that sort of scale, this synergistically leveraged with politics. What would the total of the amounts spent by global governments amount to to this date? I’d love to see some analysis on that, but only if I was close to a bar.