Read here. The IPCC held aloft the 2007 AR4 report as the gospel of climate consensus. Since the release of that publication, the "bible" has been found to be riddled with errors, sprinkled with unsupportable conjecture and filled with up to 30% of non-peer reviewed "science." Now comes a new quantitative analysis of the AR4 output that suggest at a minimum that 28% of the findings will be proven to be wrong.
This peer-reviewed research does not say which of the AR4 findings are wrong, but instead states that just based on the numbers and how the IPCC formulated the 3 major 'findings' sections, there will be at least 28% of the important impact findings that will be worthless wrong.
"If we confine our attention to those findings that refer to the future, one can ask how many IPCC findings can be expected to become verified ultimately as being accurate? For example, if we consider findings that refer to future events with likelihood in the ‘likely’ class (i.e., >66% likelihood) then if these judgments are well calibrated then it would be appropriate to conclude that as many as a third can be expected to not occur. More generally, of the 360 findings reported in the full text of WG1 across all likelihood categories and presented with associated measures of likelihood, then based on the judgments of likelihood associated with each statement we should logically expect that about 100 of these findings (~28%) will at some point be overturned...We also suggest an independent, dedicated group to monitor the process, evaluate findings as they are presented and track their fate. This would include tracking the relationship of findings and attendant uncertainties that pass up the hierarchy of documents within AR5." [Rachael Jonassen and Roger Pielke, Jr. 2011: Climatic Change]
Previous peer-reviewed postings.
Comments