IPCC and “Expert Reviewers” Ignores National Academy of Science

An April 7, 2020 release was the latestinformation available on Internet concerning the IPCC AR6 status.  It included the following excerpts:

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has extended government and expert review of the second order draft of the Working Group I contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) by six weeks to allow reviewers more time in the light of disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. 

The review, which opened on 2 March 2020 and was originally scheduled to end on 26 April, will now close on 5 June. Interested experts can register until midnight CET on 29 May at https://apps.ipcc.ch/comments/ar6wg1/sod/register.php

The Working Group I contribution to the AR6, Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, will assess large-scale climate changes, climate processes and feedback and regional climate information. The Working Group I report includes an interactive online atlas, which is also open for review comments.

The draft report has been prepared by 233 authors from 65 countries.

The first order draft of the Working Group I report received 23,462 comments from 750 expert reviewers. So far, 2,277 experts have registered to review the second order draft.

However the only “experts” with access to AR6 Working Group 1 (WG1) first or second order drafts are those who “register” with IPCC.  Presumably the 750 who reviewed the first order draft and those who finally “registered” to review second order draft continued concurring with IPCC AR5 conclusions:

Human Influence on the climate system is clear.  Increasing anthropogenic emissions have thirty times the impact of increasing radiation from the Sun on global temperatures.

One wonders how many “experts” they chose were from the National Academy of Science (NAS).  Wikipedia NAS description includes the following:

Founded in 1863 as a result of an Act of Congress that was approved by Abraham Lincoln, the NAS is charged with "providing independent, objective advice to the nation on matters related to science and technology. … to provide scientific advice to the government 'whenever called upon' by any government department."

The NAS published the following paper online on Nov 10, 2014.  (More than a year after the AR5 Climate Change September 2013 Physical Science Basis Working Group Report)AR5 ClimateScience Bas

Shortwave and Longwave Radiative Contributions to Global Warming Under Increasing CO₂

The paper’s Abstract began with:

In response to increasing concentrations of atmospheric CO₂, high-end general circulation models (GCMs) simulate an accumulation of energy at the top of the atmosphere not through a reduction in outgoing longwave radiation (OLR)—as one might expect from greenhouse gas forcing—but through an enhancement of net absorbed solar radiation (ASR).

It concluded with :

Altogether, these results suggest that, although greenhouse gas forcing predominantly acts to reduce OLR, the resulting global warming is likely caused by enhanced ASR.

The bottom line is nearly 6 years ago NAS concluded global warming was driven, not by increased blockage by anthropogenic CO2 (fossil fuel emissions), but by increased absorbed radiation from the Sun.

It’s “unlikely” the IPCC AR6 WG1 first or second order drafts reflect the NAS conclusion.  It says a lot about the status of climate debate that, nearly 6 years later, 233 authors, 750 “expert reviewers” of first draft, and more than 2770 “expert reviewers” of second draft were either unaware of the NAS conclusion or chose to ignore it.

My campaign for governor is an attempt to expose their failure.