[LachlanMinnesota]

Will the new IPCC report contain the names of organization members who disagree with the conclusions, as the initial one did, by claiming that they all agreed when they did not?

Are the data used available to others to see and evaluate?

Are the data reliable?

Were they obtained under verifiable circumstances?

Do non-IPCC scientists agree with the conclusions?

Are some of those claiming expertise non-scientists, like lawyers, politicians, and bureaucrats?

[Jack Hammer]

There’s nothing to understand.

All this ‘man made climate change’ is horse sh*t.

[clearcarbon]

"Referring to the 17 year ‘pause,’ the IPCC allows for two possibilities: that the sensitivity of the climate to increasing greenhouse gases is less than models project and that the heat added by increasing CO2 is ‘hiding’ in the deep ocean. Both possibilities contradict alarming claims."

I guess this means it's back to the IPCC Ouija Board.