So now retirement is an industry? Bob Carter is retired for heavens sake. Q&A would be better opting for more reading and less demonising. BTW I have noticed that many posts happen during business hours, why is that?
Completely inadequate IPCC models produce the ultimate deception about man made global warming
By Dr. Tim Ball Monday, December 22, 2008
E. R. Beadle said, “Half the work done in the world is to make things appear what they are not.” The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) does this with purpose and great effect. They built the difference between appearance and reality into their process. Unlike procedure used elsewhere, they produce and release a summary report independently and before the actual technical report is completed. This way the summary gets maximum media attention and becomes the public understanding of what the scientists said. Climate science is made to appear what it is not. Indeed, it is not even what is in their Scientific Report.
The pattern of falsifying appearances began early. Although he works at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), Stephen Schneider was heavily employed in the work of the IPCC as this biography notes.
Much of Schneider’s time is taken up by what he calls his “pro bono day job” for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). He was a Coordinating Lead Author in Working Group II of the IPCC from 1997 to 2001 and a lead author in Working Group I from 1994 to 1996. Currently, he is a Coordinating Lead Author for the controversial chapter on “Assessing Key Vulnerabilities and the Risks from Climate Change,” in short, defining “dangerous” climate change.” - Pubmedcentral.nih.gov
He continued this work by helping prepare the Summary for Policymakers (SPM) of the Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) released in April 2007

more

they say, “Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic GHG concentrations.” The term “very likely” is from a table reportedly produced by Schneider and means greater than 90%. Professor Roy Spencer says about probabilities in this context. “Any statements of probability are meaningless and misleading. I think the IPCC made a big mistake. They’re pandering to the public not understanding probabilities. When they say 90 percent, they make it sound like they’ve come up with some kind of objective, independent, quantitative way of estimating probabilities related to this stuff. It isn’t. All it is is a statement of faith.”
So they create an appearance of certainty about a human cause of warming. But what is the reality? The only place where CO2 is causing temperature increase is in the IPCC computer models. In every record of any duration for any time period in the history of the Earth, temperature increase precedes CO2 increase. So an incorrect assumption that a CO2 increase will cause temperature increase is built into the computer models.

One can be a skeptic about every piece of information or argument or a skeptic about one. In my case my scepticism on global warming was ignited when I saw Government in Australia accepting a report with projections out to a 100 years hence. How I wondered can people be silly enough to do such a projection from models when we all know that a few mm of error in assumption at the start can lead to Mm errors 100 years down the track. Then I noticed that the term Global Warming beloved by Mr Gore was being replaced by Climate Change with which I have less scepticism. So as an amateur radio person with some background in atmospheric physics I have been tracking what changes in communication patterns we expect if indeed there was global warming. I have not been able to find any change in radio communictions because of man induced changes to the atmosphere over the last two decades . The problem I really have with all this discussion is that all the material I read does not suggest that our temperature or other atmospheric counts are outside the levels that have occurred in the past or are likely to occur in the future. Yes there is going to be climate change and we must be prepared to deal with it. However the problems of poverty seem to me to be much more worthy of our intellectual attention. At least we know can change poverty levels.

Oramzi, sounds like you might be interested in buying this book, re the following advertisement:

In his brand-new book, Red Hot Lies: How Global Warming Alarmists Use Threats, Fraud, and Deception to Keep You Misinformed, Horner reveals how global warming alarmists, relentless in pursuing their anti-energy and anti-capitalist agenda -- together with unscrupulous scientists who see this scare as their gravy train to federal grants and foundation money -- resort to dirty tricks, smear campaigns, and outright lies, abandoning scientific standards, journalistic integrity, and the old-fashioned notions of free speech and open debate.

you'll discover:

How the global warming industry is made up of lifestyle nags and nanny-statists who are seeking to curtail our liberties -- backed by "green" industries who want the state to create mandates and hike subsidies

How Big Government, politicians and global warming nut jobs are abusing power in the pursuit of even more power, as environmental alarmists knowingly spread false and exaggerated data on global warming.

How, in the Left's efforts to suppress free speech (and scientific research), they have compared global warming dissent with "treason".

How the liberal media lie and conceal the truth while the global warming establishment moves ruthlessly to crush dissent and ruin the lives of dissenters

How that establishment, not content to dominate the mainstream media, is even propagandizing children, and not hesitating to use alarmist scare tactics to do so.

Proof that most scientists are actually global warming skeptics

Bob Carter retired? So why does he continue to proclaim his association with the James Cook University as an Adjunct Professor in his public speaking tours, his shock jock media pronouncements and his guest spots on the blogosphere?

It was a George W Bush staffer who popularised the term climate change.

Bush and Gore are propagandists. Cowboy is no different.

Because garbage science and infantile perceptions get him riled up.

Because he cares.

Because he is older and wiser.

Because he can readily identify hysterical Extreme Green bull dust when he sees it.

Because he has become familiar with Extreme Green tactics.

Because he is highly intelligent, educated and is passionate about his work.

Because he can see the gargantuan immoral waste of public money that is resulting.

Because he is not on a government grant providing income to perpetuate the AGW distortions.

Because influential paranoid people care the hell out of him.

One event I know of his air fare was paid nothing else; after he had been invited by an invalid pensioner.

Good to see you back at work, making comment and it isn't even lunch time.