EIRScienceCO2:TheGreatestScientificScandalofOurTime
byZbigniewJaworowski,M.D.,Ph.D.,D.Sc.
Introduction IPCC’s 1,600-page scientific report, which is to be released in May. In the words of the IPCC, this delay is needed forOn Feb. 2, 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) again uttered its mantra of catastrophe about adjustment of the main text,so that “Changes . . . [could be]made to ensure consistency with the ‘Summary for man-made global warming. After weeks of noisy propaganda,a 21-page “Summary for Policymakers†of the IPCC Fourth Policymakers.’ â€Not a single word in these 1,600 pages is to be in conflict with what politicians said beforehand in the Assessment Report, 2007, was presented in grandiose style in Paris to a crowd of politicians and media, accompanied by summary!
This is a strange and unusual method of operation for aa blackout of the Eiffel Tower to show that electric energy is bad. The event induced a tsunami of hysteria that ran around scientific report, and even stranger is the frankness of the IPCC’s words about the delay, disclosing its lack of scientific the world. This was probably the main aim of this clearly political paper, prepared by governmental and United Nations integrity and independence. It is exactly the same modus operandi demonstrated in the three former IPCC reports of 1990,bureaucrats, and published more than three months before the1995, and 2001:First the politics, then the science.
The IPCC style was strongly criticized some years ago,in two editorials in Nature magazine (Anonymous 1994,Maddox 1991). In each of these criticisms,Nature used Zbigniew Jaworowski is a multidisciplinary scientist,now a senior advisor at the Central Laboratory for the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects ofAtomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) as an ideal example of how Radiological Protection in Warsaw. In the winter of1957-58, he measured the concentration of CO2in thean independent and objective scientific report should be prepared, in this case a report on the global risks from all atmospheric air at Spitsbergen. From 1972 to 1991, he investigated the history of the pollution of the global sources of radiation, including nuclear weapons and Chernobyl. The UNSCEAR assessments presented each year to the atmosphere, measuring the dust preserved in 17 glaciers: in the Tatra Mountains in Poland, in the Arctic,UN General Assembly are regarded as a bible of the science of ionizing radiation. Yes, UNSCEAR mostly fits Nature’s Antarctic, Alaska, Norway, the Alps, the Himalayas,the Ruwenzori Mountains in Uganda, and the Peruvian description—but for a price. Because UNSCEAR’s scientific reports often widely differed from the catastrophic views of Andes. He has published many papers on climate, most of them concerning the CO2measurements in ice cores.the United Nations Environmental Programme or of the former UN Secretary-General, the UN bureaucracy has Two of his papers on climate appear on the website of21st Century Science & Technology magazine,squeezed the finances of UNSCEAR, down to a level that caused almost a complete halt of its activity (Jaworowskiwww.21stcenturysciencetech.com.2002).
http://www.warwickhughes.com/icecore/zjmar07.pdf
