Email 1414, March 2007: Kevin Trenberth on the political process of changing the IPCC Summary for Policymakers in a 2007 meeting at which journalists were barred: "It was hardly a closed meeting or process"

Email 1414

A brief response along the lines that there were various drafts of the report, but the final process of building a consensus among the political delegates who were present in Paris is obviously not understood. It was hardly a closed meeting or process. The SPM was indeed approved line by line by governments in Paris from 29 January to 1 February, 2007. The rationale is that the scientists determine what can be said, but the governments help determine how it can best be said. Negotiations occur over wording to ensure accuracy, balance, clarity of message, and relevance to understanding and policy. But the basic scientific message was not changed and Wasdell's claims have no basis in fact.

Environmentalism is fascism

Summaries are not scientific statements. They are written during multi-day meetings where every line is agonizingly word-smithed on a giant screen in front of 195 government reps. AR2007’s Summary writing proceedings ran 48 hours non-stop. Enviro-activists may observe these proceedings but journalists are barred. Journalists glean info on these proceedings by interviewing green activists. When the Summary is released, the AR is held back to render fact-checking impossible during the media furore. When the AR is released, the matter is no longer newsworthy.