• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

RealClimate

Climate science from climate scientists...

  • Start here
  • Model-Observation Comparisons
  • Miscellaneous Climate Graphics
  • Surface temperature graphics
You are here: Home / Climate Science / IPCC draft: No comment.

IPCC draft: No comment.

4 May 2006 by group

As everyone has now realised, the second-order draft of the new IPCC report has become very widely available and many of the contributors to this site, commenters and readers will have seen copies. Part of the strength of the IPCC process are the multiple stages of review – the report is already significantly improved (in clarity and scientific basis) from the first round of reviews, and one can anticipate further improvements from the ongoing round as well. Thus no statements from this draft report can be considered ‘official’. While most of the contents of the report will come as no surprise to frequent visitors here, we have decided that we are not going to discuss the report until it is finalised and released (sometime in February 2007). At that time, we’ll go chapter by chapter hopefully pulling out the interesting bits, but until then, we feel it’s more appropriate to respect the ‘Do not cite or quote’ injunctions that can be found on every page. We trust that our commenters will likewise respect the process. Patience, people, patience!

Filed Under: Climate Science, IPCC

Reader Interactions

51 Responses to "IPCC draft: No comment."

Comments pagination

« Previous 1 2
  1. Joseph O'Sullivan says

    24 May 2006 at 8:53 PM

    Thanks Gavin for the ClimateScienceWatch link (#37). I am familiar for the processes in legal/regulatory areas and as most lawyers will tell you process and procedure are everything. I understand the scientific review process for the IPCC report a little better now.

    Hopefully an open review process will be useful if there isn’t too much political interference.

    The Yale report (#50) is long but very informative.

« Older Comments

Primary Sidebar

Search

Search for:

Email Notification

get new posts sent to you automatically (free)
Loading

Recent Posts

  • High-resolution ‘fingerprint’ images reveal a weakening Atlantic Ocean circulation (AMOC)
  • Unforced variations: Oct 2025
  • “But you said the ice was going to disappear in 10 years!”
  • Time and Tide Gauges wait for no Voortman
  • Lil’ NAS Express
  • DOE CWG Report “Moot”?

Our Books

Book covers
This list of books since 2005 (in reverse chronological order) that we have been involved in, accompanied by the publisher’s official description, and some comments of independent reviewers of the work.
All Books >>

Recent Comments

  • Steven Emmerson on “But you said the ice was going to disappear in 10 years!”
  • Steven Emmerson on Unforced variations: Oct 2025
  • Ken Towe on High-resolution ‘fingerprint’ images reveal a weakening Atlantic Ocean circulation (AMOC)
  • Susan Anderson on Unforced variations: Oct 2025
  • Piotr on Unforced variations: Oct 2025
  • Susan Anderson on Unforced variations: Oct 2025
  • JCM on Unforced variations: Oct 2025
  • Susan Anderson on “But you said the ice was going to disappear in 10 years!”
  • Ron R. on High-resolution ‘fingerprint’ images reveal a weakening Atlantic Ocean circulation (AMOC)
  • Ron R. on High-resolution ‘fingerprint’ images reveal a weakening Atlantic Ocean circulation (AMOC)
  • Atomsk’s Sanakan on “But you said the ice was going to disappear in 10 years!”
  • Atomsk’s Sanakan on “But you said the ice was going to disappear in 10 years!”
  • Paul Pukite (@whut) on “But you said the ice was going to disappear in 10 years!”
  • Radge Havers on Unforced variations: Oct 2025
  • zebra on High-resolution ‘fingerprint’ images reveal a weakening Atlantic Ocean circulation (AMOC)
  • Radge Havers on Unforced variations: Oct 2025
  • Piotr on “But you said the ice was going to disappear in 10 years!”
  • frankclimate on High-resolution ‘fingerprint’ images reveal a weakening Atlantic Ocean circulation (AMOC)
  • Piotr on “But you said the ice was going to disappear in 10 years!”
  • zebra on Unforced variations: Oct 2025
  • Martin Smith on High-resolution ‘fingerprint’ images reveal a weakening Atlantic Ocean circulation (AMOC)
  • Atomsk’s Sanakan on “But you said the ice was going to disappear in 10 years!”
  • Keith Woollard on High-resolution ‘fingerprint’ images reveal a weakening Atlantic Ocean circulation (AMOC)
  • David on Unforced variations: Oct 2025
  • David on “But you said the ice was going to disappear in 10 years!”
  • Piotr on High-resolution ‘fingerprint’ images reveal a weakening Atlantic Ocean circulation (AMOC)
  • Piotr on High-resolution ‘fingerprint’ images reveal a weakening Atlantic Ocean circulation (AMOC)
  • Piotr on High-resolution ‘fingerprint’ images reveal a weakening Atlantic Ocean circulation (AMOC)
  • Piotr on “But you said the ice was going to disappear in 10 years!”
  • Jaime Palter on High-resolution ‘fingerprint’ images reveal a weakening Atlantic Ocean circulation (AMOC)

Footer

ABOUT

  • About
  • Translations
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact Page
  • Login

DATA AND GRAPHICS

  • Data Sources
  • Model-Observation Comparisons
  • Surface temperature graphics
  • Miscellaneous Climate Graphics

INDEX

  • Acronym index
  • Index
  • Archives
  • Contributors

Realclimate Stats

1,384 posts

11 pages

247,775 comments

Copyright © 2025 · RealClimate is a commentary site on climate science by working climate scientists for the interested public and journalists.