The Birth and Growth of the IPCC Conor McMenemie. mcmenemieconor@hotmail.com
From the mid 1960s the countries south of the Sahara saw much of their lands being suddenly and continuously attacked by the desert. Their rainfall regime progressively shortened, making life for flora and fauna near impossible. In the USA context this might be like the northern states having their winters extended by 2 to 4 months into near arctic conditions, producing death and displacement. How is unknown here but for the 20 years from 1984 a Nigerian official Godwin Obasi was continuously elected as Director General of the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO). During his tenure it was found during an enforced audit that millions of dollars of UN funds had been syphoned from various WMO departments into a 'staff fund'. This fund was distributed by a Sudanese official (Muhammad Hassan) towards various countries to pay their WMO dues and send representatives to Geneva, to incentivise them to vote for particular personnel and policies. Thus the WMO experienced a 'coup-administrative' by having a near 50-state Pax-Africana voting block, controlled by a small number of Sub Saharan individuals. In 1988 the WMO birthed the IPCC, which has grown to become one of the most influential political/economic superpowers ever. Although the IPCC reports presents much valid science, it is prudent to consider that their published 'Guidance of Policy Makers' is a reflection of the intent of the original Pax-Africana. The presumed cause of the Sub Saharan strife was the hole in the o-zone layer, then when it was observed to be improving, attention immediately shifted to other emissions form the wealthier northern hemisphere. A publicity machine to expound this narrative was set in motion. Promotions into positions of authority and influence of those who would support this opinion followed at the same pace. Yet the now famous marketing sound-bite about the 'overwhelming opinion of scientists' reveals the true nature of the IPCC emissions issue – science is not about opinion, science is about refining data. 'Opinion' is what you get when there is a difficulty with the data. Also that sound-bite absolves it's author from liability, since it refers entirely to other peoples opinion. The author knows it is less than reliable, yet wishes you to adhere to its policies.
The realities are that the global warming heat is overwhelmingly an oceanic issue, severely diisproportionatly in the Atlantic mid-latitudes. This eliminates the northern hemisphere industrial emissions theory as being the cause. The Nile Climate Engine (NiCE) explains, with reference to known conditions and historic data, what is really causing this problem. It is simple basic meteorology, cheap and easy to fix – yet is universally opposed by all those who have made careers and strategic plans based upon the unfounded emissions theory. CM.