IPCC Corruption Included Ignoring Facts and Science

Commentary, Climate, Frontier Centre

Phil Jones, disgraced and dismissed Director of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU), granted BBC reporter Roger Harrabin an interview. Why Harrabin? His reporting has shown bias on all the IPCC and CRU activities. Leaked emails showed the CRU gang used friends in the BBC and that apparently continues. Prevarication, evasion, half-truths continue in Phil Jones’ answers. Despite this there are stunning admissions from Jones. “There is a tendency in the IPCC reports to leave out inconvenient findings, especially in the part(s) most likely to be read by policy makers.”

It’s a deliberate strategy not just a tendency and not only in the Summary for Policymakers (SPM). Many major factors that create weather and can trigger change are ignored in the Scientific Report and computer models. A long report is necessary to itemize problems and what is omitted. The need to ‘prove’ CO2 was the primary culprit was the driving force behind all actions and it peaked in the 2007 Report. 

The 2007 Intergovernmental on Climate Change (IPCC) Report says they’re 90% certain global warming of the last 50 years is due to increasing atmospheric CO2. They acknowledge that before 1950 the sun explained over 50% of the temperature increase. As the Summary for Policymakers notes, “Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic GHG concentrations. It is likely that there has been significant anthropogenic warming over the past 50 years averaged over each continent (except Antarctica).”

Exclusion of Antarctica is a convenient omission and makes a mockery of their claim, because it cooled over the period.Their solar explanation for half the change prior to 1950 uses only one part the sun’s effect on global temperature, namely electromagnetic radiation (ER), (heat and light). They were flummoxed by the decrease of temperature from 2002 while CO2 levels continued to rise. Jones now concedes, “There was no significant warming from 1998-2009” and “Neither the rate nor magnitude of recent warming is exceptional.” He also concedes the Medieval Warm Period was warmer than at present. These statements alone completely destroy all claims about the validity of the science and claims of the IPCC.

The Sun They Ignore

Why did they include ER and ignore major solar factors of the Milankovitch Effect and changes in solar magnetism that cause temperature change? The simple answer was to counteract the claim that the Sun was causing warming. Variance in ER for the short periods of record are about 0.15%, which sounds like very little, but theoretical calculations show a 6% variance explains all temperature variance in the history of the Earth. They manipulate the data and models to attribute temperature change since 1950 almost totally to CO2. As Jones explains, “The IPCC models may have overestimated the climate sensitivity for greenhouse gases, underestimated natural variability, or both.”


Key to understanding IPCC claims are what they leave out. Leaked emails talk about the selective process they employed. For example, until recently all textbooks showed the Earth’s orbit around the Sun as a fixed ellipse. Actually we have known for over 150 years that the orbit is constantly changing from almost circular as it is now to more extreme ellipse as it was 22,000 years ago.  (Figure1)

Figure 1: Orbital Eccentricity

Constantly changing orbit is caused primarily by the gravitational pull of Jupiter. Obviously the amount of energy received at the Earth varies as the elliptical orbit changes. Currently the difference between when the earth is closest to the sun (perihelion) and furthest away (aphelion)  is ±3.5% for a total difference of 7%. However at full ellipticity the difference is ±8.5% for a total of 17%. The complete cycle from minimum to maximum ellipticity and back is 100,000 years. This means the distance between Earth and Sun is changing every year, which affects the amount of energy received. In 1864 Scottish scientist James Croll published a paper that began 20 years of research calculating how the orbital changes caused global temperature change. It culminated in a 1867 book titled, Climate and Time.


Croll also knew two other changes were important. Change in Earth’s tilt oscillating between 21.4° and 24.8° with the current angle being approximately 23.5° and decreasing. Full cycle from minimum to maximum and back to minimum takes 40,000 years.

Figure 2: Obliquity of the Ecliptic or Changes in Tilt.

Precession of the Equinox

The other is the position of the Earth in its orbit around the sun on which equinoxes (equal length of day and night) occur, currently March 20/21 and September 22/23.  Figure 3 shows two examples of opposite positions and presentation of the Earth to the Sun.

Figure 3: Precession of the Equinox. Aphelion means away from the sun and parahelion means closest to the sun.


The Precession sequence is much shorter for the full cycle to occur and varies between 19,000 and 23,000 years.

Rush To Condemn

Serbian mathematician, Milutin Milankovitch, was related by marriage or family to two other global thinkers. Alfred Wegener, who introduced continental drift and Vladimir Koppen, who introduced a global climate classification system. Beginning in 1914 and interrupted by wars Milankovitch worked to combine the three effects of orbit, tilt and precession to determine the net effect on global temperature. He worked without computers and calculated the net energy first at 55°, 60° and 75° North because changes there are critical. Subsequently he added calculations for latitudes from 5°N and in 1930 published his results in Koppens’s Manual of Climatology with the title “Mathematical Climatology and the Astronomical Theory of Climatic Changes.” After initial wide acceptance his theory and evidence were rejected because radio carbon dating suggested the chronology was wrong.

His son believed his father died of a broken heart. It turned out the radio carbon dating was wrong, but it took time for recovery of his theory. I recall meetings in the 1970s when mention of Milankovitch brought violent negative reaction. Then in the early 1990s he was cited as an explanation with no protests. Most people still have no idea about these constant and significant changes. The IPCC do not include them in their computer models. Andrew Weaver, a lead author of the Chapter on computer models, told me the changes were too slow to be of significance. The changes are easily put into a computer and are significant especially when you are making predictions for 50 and 100 years.

Watch the Richter Scale as Politicians Jump Off the IPCC Wagon

Jones only concedes some points but they are enough from the high priest of the CRU and IPCC to completely destroy its credibility. What will the sycophants and exploiters like Gore and the Mainstream Media do now? What about politicians who based positions and policy on environment and energy on the IPCC? What about the massive scams of Cap And Trade? What about the extreme environmental groups who have bullied and preached from the moral high ground? What about the scientists who took vehement positions without understanding? It is a very sad day for science, the people and the world.