Complete your submission here:..
This inquiry will explore the latest conclusions of the IPCC, the extent to which the conclusions are robust, and their impact on national and international policy making.”
I had a go at writing a submission myself. It was easy and was accepted. You have until the 10th December 2013 to submit..
This is my submission
My name is S… M….( crikey) . I am a retired science teacher and an amateur meterologist/climatoligist
As a follower of climate issues
I feel a basic organisational flaw is inherent in the organisation called the IPCC..
The IPCC is 100% AGW lobbyists/scientists
There are many other climate groups/ scientists that are 100% the opposite. They are 100% AGW sceptics
The supposed AGW consensus is a fallacy
A true outlook on future climate cannot be achieved until the reports incorporate both sides of the debate
You must recognise that the IPCC is 100% biased and committed to AGW science alone and pays little to no attention to natural variability
The 100% reliance on computer climate simulations is worrying.. They are beta products un-trialled and unproven
The IPCC research is selected and chosen with an affirmative position ONLY!!
You need to incorporate some of the oppositions science to get a balance of the true body of knowledge of climate science
The climate journals are controlled by AGW protagonists and alternative science is squashed or hidden is so called sub standard journals
Thank goodness this input/submission is a start to governments thinking about the alternative views of many climate scientists who are not AGW advocates
If the UK met office wants to lead world climate research . They will not shun and demoralise alternative research.!. Employ some AGW sceptics… on an equal basis!!
Climate models should NOT be the main source of climate prediction this early in their development