The Tale of the Expert Reviewer
Brad Johnson has been looking over Marc Morano's Pack of Climate Denial Jokers, and somehow shuffled DiplPhil Dick into the weatherman deck only to have the real thing show up in the comments with an amusing line of self promotion The bunnies have previously met Richard S. Courtney, not of Epson, but his appearance at the Wonk Room wins the 2009 Tim Ball for Resume Stretching
Eli inquires of the bunny gallery, what a suitable recompense for this information would be, but the formulation
However, I write to provide a correction. You list my affiliation as being “CoalTrans International” but I have had no connection with that organisation for nearly a decade.
I have several present affiliations and I suggest that the most appropriate for you to mention on your blog is that I am “An Expert Peer Reviewer for the United Nations (UN) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)”. This affiliation seems most appropriate because it states that I am one of “the thousands of UN scientists” whom your organisation asserts to be noteworthy.
The IPCC’s most recent scientific so-called reports are its Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) and its Synthesis Report. And I was asked to peer review the AR4 by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the Synthesis Report by the IPCC’s Chairman (Rajendra Pechauri).
If you wish to know my other affiliations then we can negotiate the fee for the Disclosure Agreement.
And I was asked to peer review the AR4 by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the Synthesis Report by the IPCC’s Chairman (Rajendra Pechauri).makes it real clear that the invitation was not personal, but a general one sent out to the world at large, often on boxes of cereal. Everyone and his dad was invited to review the AR4. Courtney will now try and get us to pay money for his virtual autographed Pechauri, but since Rajendra Pachauri, head of the IPCC has personally assured Eli that he did not invite Courtney to review anything, let us go on. This was soon followed by
As far as Eli and the rest of the world is concerned, the Expert Reviewers, volunteered their comments, and had no ongoing relationship with the IPCC.
My thanks are three-fold.
Firstly, I do not usually give thanks for flattery but in this case I do. I am grateful that you have flattered me by listing me among such illustrious names as Lindzen, Singer, Spencer, Pielke, Harris, Briggs and etc..
Secondly, I am grateful that you have given me such amusement. You promote the myth of a scientific consensus that ‘dangerous man-made global warming is a reality’ but publish a list of dozens of eminent scientists who dispute such dangerous warming exists! I laughed so much it brought tears to my eyes.
Thirdly, I am grateful that you did amend the “affiliation” you attribute to me, but the amendment was to add “(ret)” after the incorrect affiliation. (And that gave me another laugh so is part of the amusement that I appreciate so much.)
But – as I explained – my appropriate and present “affiliation” for inclusion on your list is “United Nations (UN) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)”. Failure to replace my historic “affiliation” with my present “affiliation” to the IPCC is a blatant misrepresentation because you have had a clear explanation that my “affiliation” with the IPCC is current and is pertinent.
In conclusion, and in a spirit of good will, I provide the following comment which I hope is helpful to you.
The best is a comment from George Smith
I’m not embarrassed to be included with those weathermen luminaries above; specially Richard S. Courtney; who is one of those world famous IPCC chaps the UN keeps bragging about;Comments?