I’ve noticed that Donna Laframboise is creating a minor spike for incoming traffic of late and it is due to her mundane activities with the 5th IPCC report that she has had an early look at. There isn’t much that I could say that Dana hasn’t already written in his excellent post.
We can put her noise in the correct basket – that is, uncritical, scientifically untrained and overwhelming superficial – and, like I’ve said about the early “sceptics” on the scene, we can take this as great news.
What did she find? Nothing. She doesn’t like that they use grey literature. Donna would be kidding herself if she thought that the validity of the report hinged on this grey literature, rather than that it is like “bonus” information of relevance.
So back to the droning; you can think of the IPCC as a delinquent teenager; someone you wouldn’t take as having much knowledge, so sleep assured they have nothing of compelling evidence supporting just how stupid our activities are in respect to our geo-engineering of the atmosphere.
By the time the report is release, these “sceptics” aren’t going to have much left to say about it!