A devastating rebuttal to the new UN climate statement

You can read the whole thing here.

A couple of excerpts:

Yes ice is melting in the Northern Hemisphere. This is 15% of the world's ice. 85% of the world's ice is in Antarctica, which is increasing. Seriously. I know you don't believe this if you trust the media, but the ice that is melting in Greenland is tiny compared to the ice that is increasing at the South Pole. In fact, the IPCC gets most of its prjected sea rise from thermal expansion of warmer oceans, not from ice melting. And don't you love the "planting seasons are changing." That sounds like its scary, or something, until you recognize the truth is that planting seasons are changing, becoming longer and more beneficial to food production!
...
Another technique used by the UN that we see in play here is their willingness to cherry-pick one author that follows the UN narrative to refute a whole body of science that is contrary to the narrative. Thus, the UN latched onto Michael Mann's hockey stick to overturn a consensus that there was a Medieval warm period, and now they have latched onto Nicholas Stern to overturn the opinion of, approximately, every other economist in the world who think CO2 mitigation will be really expensive.

An excerpt from this comment:

...how the UN is getting away with this is astonishing. It is quite simply the most absurd manipulation of science in the past 100 years. It is a hurricane of ideology tearing through the once respected sciences of climatology and meteorology that will leave their reputations in tatters when the real truth inevitably emerges.