The fundamental flaws with IPCC – from a scientific point of view!

This post gives an overview over the most fundamental scientific flaws with the governance of IPCC – United Nations Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change. This post summarize the findings in a few handful of posts where I go more into details about these flaws.

I suggest that all who are interested in how IPCC is governed should have a look at the governing documents I link to in this post.

And if anyone wonder if the principles, processes and guidance notes governing IPCC complies with sound scientific principles, I suggest to start by reading the first 26 soothing pages of the following work: The logic of scientific discovery.


United Nations writing and review process for IPCC is a good example of how science has become politicized. This is a political process not a scientific process:




Anyone thinking that IPCC is unbiased should have a look at how heavily biased IPCC was from the very beginning:

Report of the second session of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 28 June 1989



The Principles governing IPCC work are more or less free from sound scientific principles. Even though openness is required by the principles – there are no mentioning of scrutiny and no general requirements to closely observe other sound scientific principles like the principles identified in: The principles of science (v7.5).

Rather than imposing strict scientific principles on IPCC, United Nations allowed IPCC to be governed by:
– (§1) the unscientific principle of a mission to support an established view

– (§10) the unscientific principle of striving to establish consensus (§10)

– (§11) an approval process and organisation principle which must, by its nature, diminish dissenting views.




The Guidance Note for Lead Authors of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report on Consistent Treatment of Uncertainty shows how subjectivism has been introduced and endorsed by IPCC. That is the document behind the subjective confidence terminology used by IPCC. Scientific statements are supposed to be objective – not subjective.


IPCC confidence scale



Ironically, by promoting and using unsound scientific principles, United Nation has become a kind of international problem of cultural character that it was put up to achieve international co-operation in solving:

Article 1

The Purposes of the United Nations are:

3) To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all …

Within their charter – United Nations could have:

– Promoted both openness and scrutiny within science

– Discouraged strong political influence on science

– Discouraged attempts to silence opponents and limit free exchange of thoughts

Rather than promoting freedom, openness and scrutiny within science, in accordance with its charter – United Nations is leading a decline in scientific standards and values.

2 thoughts on “The fundamental flaws with IPCC – from a scientific point of view!

  1. What else is new? Of course that should be obvious to anyone after a critical look at how the United Nations deals with Israel. The scam nature of the UN has been obvious for decades. Only last summer another UN agency, UNESCO declared there is no connection between Jews and Jerusalem. As far as I am concerned the entire UN institution should simply be disbanded and dissolved. It is worse than useless.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s