Global warming | Chemical & Engineering News
Volume 85 Issue 15 | p. 5 | Letters
Issue Date: April 9, 2007

Global warming

Department: Letters

I READ WITH GREAT INTEREST your editorial on global warming (C&EN, Feb. 12, page 3). In the last two paragraphs you say, "According to IPCC [the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change], its reports pass through a rigorous two-stage scientific and technical review process. Drafts are first circulated to specialists with significant expertise and publications in the field. Revised drafts are circulated to governments and all authors and expert reviewers. In other words, IPCC conducts a review of the best science available and reports on it."

You may recall that a previous and similar IPCC report, discussed in great detail in C&EN many years ago, was similarly circulated to specialists and the revised drafts circulated to authors and reviewers. But this was all for naught. After widespread universal agreement, the summary to the final report (and, regrettably, the only part read by most people) was, as outlined in C&EN, unilaterally changed by the panel chairman, a Californian, immediately prior to publication, to markedly increase the blame for global warming attributable to greenhouse gases.

I have been a confirmed skeptic ever since! However, thanks for C&EN. I read it with great interest each week.

Michael A. Short
Laguna Hills, Calif.

Chemical & Engineering News
ISSN 0009-2347
Copyright © American Chemical Society

Leave A Comment

*Required to comment