RSS

Monthly Archives: April 2010

Yet another lead author falsely cited; tourism mistake in the AR4

Barry Smit

You might recall an earlier false claim in the AR4 about tourism, about Canada and wildfires. There is another mistake in the AR4 regarding tourism, this time it is in WGII, Chapter 9.4.7 Tourism. The following claim appears:

Although scientific evidence is still lacking, it is probable that flood risks and water-pollution-related diseases in low-lying regions (coastal areas), as well as coral reef bleaching as a result of climate change, could impact negatively on tourism (McLeman and Smit, 2004).

First of all, this claim is so uncertain it probably shouldn’t even be in the report. Let’s read it again with all the uncertain words in bold:

Although scientific evidence is still lacking, it is probable that flood risks and water-pollution-related diseases in low-lying regions (coastal areas), as well as coral reef bleaching as a result of climate change, could impact negatively on tourism (McLeman and Smit, 2004).

In any event, they support this claim with McLeman and Smit, 2004. This is referenced as:
Read the rest of this entry »

Advertisements
 
10 Comments

Posted by on April 28, 2010 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: ,

AR4 makes false claim about Bangladesh mangroves

I was looking through the AR4 recently in order to look at the recent Bangladeshi scientist’s claim that the AR4 exaggerated how much sea level rise would affect their country. That may be another post, because I found another false claim related to Bangladesh.

In WGII, Chapter 10.2.4.3 Oceans and coastal zones, the following claim appears (bold mine):

Evidence of the impacts of climate-related factors on mangroves remain limited to the severe destruction of mangroves due to reduction of freshwater flows and salt-water intrusion in the Indus delta and Bangladesh (IUCN, 2003a).

Notice the “and Bangladesh” on the end. Read the rest of this entry »

 
14 Comments

Posted by on April 25, 2010 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: ,

What the IPCC Citizen's Audit really means

Yesterday, the IPCC Citizen’s Audit results were released. They show that out of 18,531 references in the AR4, 5,587 (30%) are not peer-reviewed. These results are making their rounds around the internet, but what do they really mean?

First, I need to state that I was involved in the audit. I was an auditor, and I also helped Donna Laframboise in a few other ways, such as creating a guide to auditing the report. If you’ve ever visited this site in the past, you know that I have looked fairly in depth at the AR4 and found several interesting things, such as the boot cleaning guide, the master’s student story, the master’s students citations, the false wildfire-tourism claim, all the news articles, the issues with the authors falsely citing themselves, and other interesting stuff. I already know that the AR4 isn’t entirely based on peer-reviewed material.
Read the rest of this entry »

 
4 Comments

Posted by on April 15, 2010 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: ,