What should be noted though, is that the IPCC is, by definition, a propaganda operation. Its self-defined role is, "to assess … the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation".
The organisation, by its own account, takes as a given the existence of "human-induced climate change" and, therefore, it is entirely unsurprising that it finds: "human influence on climate clear". It could do nothing else.
On the other hand, no one with any sense, or understanding of the basics of science, could take their science from an overtly political organisation, with such an obviously distorted statement of principles.
By its own definition, the IPCC is not a scientific body. It calls itself an intergovernmental body. Its documents, it says, should involve "both peer review by experts and review by governments". And, while the former does not attest to good science, the latter invalidates it. Governments do not and cannot produce science. The governmental process of the IPCC means we are getting politics, not science.
With that, one has to be quite firm. One cannot say, "apart from that, what did you think of the report?" The politicisation of science invalidates the scientific process. End of. The IPCC has not produced science. It has produced a series of political statements.
By the same measure, the evaluation of the IPCC output is not a scientific task – it is essentially political, exploring the reasons why politics is masquerading as science. But the moment the scientific credentials are accepted, the battle is lost – it is being fought on the ground dictated by the enemy.
