Advertisement

If you have an ACS member number, please enter it here so we can link this account to your membership. (optional)

ACS values your privacy. By submitting your information, you are gaining access to C&EN and subscribing to our weekly newsletter. We use the information you provide to make your reading experience better, and we will never sell your data to third party members.

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCES TO C&EN

Environment

Global warming

April 9, 2007 | A version of this story appeared in Volume 85, Issue 15

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.

Article:

This article has been sent to the following recipient:

0 /1 FREE ARTICLES LEFT THIS MONTH Remaining
Chemistry matters. Join us to get the news you need.