Do you think the IPCC should be disbanded?

Not a bad idea. There are enough real problems in the world that the UN should be spending their money on.

Food for thought, thanks.

The IPCC is a political organization, so its processes are going to be foreign to scientists. Politicians and government need things distilled down to a few technical and policy details.

Interesting that it starts out with a long quote from Lord Nigel Lawson.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigel_Lawson

"In the cabinet reshuffle of September 1981, Lawson was promoted to the position of Secretary of State for Energy. During his tenure at the Department of Energy he set the course for the later privatizations of the gas and electricity industries.

In 2004, along with six others, Lawson wrote a letter to The Times criticising the Kyoto Protocol and claiming that there were substantial scientific uncertainties surrounding climate change, he also wrote on the same subject in the November 2005 issue of Prospect magazine. Shortly afterwards, the House of Lords Economics Committee of which Lawson was a member, undertook an inquiry into the topic, which produced a report consistent with the arguments of Lawson's letter.

Shortly after the release of this report, the British government established the Stern Review, an inquiry undertaken by the UK Treasury and headed by Sir Nicholas Stern. The Stern Review found that the potential costs of climate change far exceeded the costs of a program to stabilise the climate.

Lawson's recent lecture to the Centre for Policy Studies think-tank, published 1 November 2006 criticises the Stern Review and proposes what it describes as a rational approach, advocating adaptation to changes in global climate, rather than attempting to mitigate or reverse it.

Lawson also contributed to the 2007 documentary film The Great Global Warming Swindle.

2007: Chairman of Central European Trust (CET). Clients include: BP Amoco, Royal Dutch/Shell Group, Texaco"

"Nigel Lawson, one of Britain's Chancellors of the Exchequer during the Thatcher Era (Secretary of the Treasury for those needing a US translation) and more recently known as the father of Nigella Lawson (a UK cooking diva), has weighed into the climate debate with a recent broadside calling for the abolition of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). Based on a curious report by the UK House of Lords Economics Affairs committee (in which they made clear that they had no scientific expertise), Lawson demands that the only global scientific assessment process on climate change be shut down, and replaced with ….well what exactly?"

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=203

Now can we think of any reasons why a politician with a long history of working with the energy and oil industries, now apparently in a coporate role working with them, might be taking their side?

The fact that the recommendation is to simply disband the IPCC, and not have any replacement process to study climate change, is very revealing about the motivations of the attackers.

Has anyone seen this in any news? ? ?

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=22401

"U.N. Blackballs International Scientists from Climate Change Conference

(CHICAGO, Illinois - December 5, 2007) -- The United Nations has rejected all attempts by a group of dissenting scientists seeking to present information at the climate change conference taking place in Bali, Indonesia.

The International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC) has been denied the opportunity to present at panel discussions, side events, and exhibits; its members were denied press credentials. The group consists of distinguished scientists from Africa, Australia, India, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

The scientists, citing pivotal evidence on climate change published in peer-reviewed journals, have expressed their opposition to the UN's alarmist theory of anthropogenic global warming. As the debate on man-made global warming has been heating up, the UN has tried to freeze out the scientists and new evidence, summarily dismissing them with the claim "the science is settled."

This alone should be well published - Then the IPCC is finished!

Well, that would imply that they have some one or something over them that has power over them.

Don't worry. It'll go away. The individual scientists that make up the IPCC will then downplay their role and claim all along that they were acrually skeptical of AGW.

Seeing that it's just a political group, yes.

Sure. Just as soon as climate change ends.

Yes, I am for disbanding any and all bureaucracies.

Yes, but first,...what is ipcc ?