|
UN's Climate Bible Gets 21 "F"s on Report Card
- all 18,531 references cited in the 2007 IPCC report were examined
- 5,587 are not peer-reviewed
- IPCC chairman's claim that the report relies solely on peer-reviewed sources is not supported
- each chapter was audited three times; the result most favorable to the IPCC was used
- 21 out of 44 chapters contain so few peer-reviewed references, they get an F
- 43 citizen auditors in 12 countries participated in this project
- full report card here
- detailed results here
|
Citizen Audit Main Findings
released April 14, 2010
| grade |
chapters
(out of 44) |
% of chapters
receiving this grade |
F
(59% & below) |
21 |
48 |
D
(60-69%) |
4 |
9 |
C
(70-79%) |
6 |
14 |
B
(80-89%) |
5 |
11 |
A
(90-100%) |
8 |
18 |
Table 1 [web image here]
BACKGROUND AND INTRO
United Nations countries belong to an organization called the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which publishes a report every six years. Often referred to as the "climate bible" the latest one was released in 2007 and is relied on by governments around the world. Billions of dollars are spent on national and international policies based on its findings. Judges consult it when trying cases. Scholars and journalists cite it thousands of times a year.
The IPCC report contains 44 chapters and is nearly 3,000 pages long. Written by people organized into three teams - Working Group 1, 2 and 3 - it consists of three smaller reports bundled into one. PEER-REVIEWED LITERATURE CLAIM
The chairman of the IPCC has declared repeatedly that the report is based solely on peer-reviewed literature. (This means research papers that have been submitted to an academic journal, scrutinized by anonymous referees, and frequently altered in order to qualify for publication. Although the peer-review process does not guarantee accuracy, the fact that research findings have undergone this process promotes a feeling of confidence.) This Citizen Audit focused its attention on the peer-reviewed literature claim. A team of 43 volunteers from 12 countries examined the list of references at the end of each chapter. We sorted these references into two groups - articles published in peer-reviewed academic journals and other references. (Non-peer-reviewed material is often called "grey literature".) Then we calculated the percentage of references that do, indeed, appear to be peer-reviewed. In elementary schools in the United States, students are assigned grades ranging from an A to an F, based on the mark they've achieved out of 100 (see Wikipedia's table here). Most parents would be alarmed if their child brought home a report card similar to the one received by the IPCC. 21 out of 44 chapters contain so few peer-reviewed references that the IPCC received an F. The IPCC relied on peer-reviewed literature less than 60 percent of the time in these chapters. 5,587 references in the IPCC report were not peer-reviewed. Among these documents are press releases, newspaper and magazine articles, discussion papers, MA and PhD theses, working papers, and advocacy literature published by environmental groups. |
