Lasts reminder of Laframboise’s critique of the IPCC. Now over 1100 visits.
Solutioneering is a term invented to describe the standard practice of ideologues and bureaucrats empowered by Big Government. James Gordon described the process thus: 1 The Solutioneer (S) identifies a Problem (practically any problem will do). 2 It is designated as a Very Big Problem. 3 The Solution is announced. 4 the Solutioneer advises that the rather steep price is not a worry because it is not really a cost, it is an Investment and also it will Cost More to Fix Later. 5 It is a Very Urgent Problem so there can be no delay. 6 Carping critics who claim (a) it is not such a serious problem and (b) there are better and cheaper ways to go are scolded for (a) not knowing anything and (b) being wicked ideologues (and criminally irresponsible).
In a nutshell, solutioneering is a solution in search of a problem.
Think the NBN, Pink Bats and most of the schemes introduced on the run by the Rudd and Gillard governments.
Consider the IPCC and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
At a speech celebrating the 20th birthday of the IPCC the chairman stated “The UNFCCC is our main customer, if I could label them as such, and our interaction with them enriches the relevance of our work” (Laframboise p 79).
The UNFCCC convened in 1992 at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro and it turns out that they are the Arch Solutioneers behind the whole climate scam. Nearly 30 years ago they decided that greenhouse gasses are The Problem and 154 nations signed up in principle, followed in due course by the Kyoto Protocol which is a key component of the UNFCCC process.
So for 20 years the UNFCCC had a brief to reduce human emissions and failing to do so would be “nothing less than criminal irresponsibility”. The IPCC is the device to recruit scientists to support the agenda. Observe the steps:
Step one was the political decision that a greenhouse gas treaty was a worthy and achievable goal.
Step two was the recognition that before such a treaty could be negotiated, certain documents – representing a common understanding – were required.
Step three involved enlisting scientists to help produce such documents. (p.80)
Laframboise’s point is that the UN did not wait for climate science to mature, 19 years ago political operators in the organization decided on the solution to a problem that legitimate climate scientists never depicted in alarming terms.
She notes that the shortest version of the Climate Bible appeared in 1990. Its findings were tentative. Yet by June 1992, aided by environmental activists, the UN had successfully convinced a majority of the world’s governments to sign a framework document that declared greenhouse gases to be arch villains. ( p 81).
And now in 2018 as the game is increasingly obviously lost on the field of genuine science the response of the IPCC is to emulate the Europeans in dealing with natives in the colonies who don’t understand what they are saying. SHOUT AT THEM!