# wrote on Jan 3
rd, 2014 at 12:59pm:
Didn't the IPCC put their confidence at the 95 to 100% level?
What are your qualifications, such that you can judge that they don't have the data for that level of confidence?
Lack of accountability clouding the climate change debate
January 3, 2014
John McLean
The world's so-called authority on climate change engages in exaggerated science and has become a political tool.The reality is that the IPCC is in effect little more than a UN-sponsored lobby group, created specifically to investigate and push the ''man-made warming'' line. With no similar organisations to examine other potential causes of climate change, it's only the IPCC voice that is heard. But the IPCC's voice isn't heard in context and with all the necessary caveats; it's distorted via the UNFCCC and others who imply that the IPCC is the sole scientific authority on climate matters.
Of course those with vested interest support it, which include governments, politicians, government bodies, ''green'' groups and many scientists. Ultimately it's the unquestioning media, or perhaps a media unwilling to admit that the UN and its agencies might be dishonest or wrong, that misleads the public into believing the IPCC is something it's not.
John McLean is the author of three peer-reviewed papers on climate and an expert reviewer for the latest IPCC report. He is also a climate data analyst and a member of the International Climate Science Coalition.
http://www.smh.com.au/comment/lack-of-accountability-clouding-the-climate-change...