Judith Curry also believes the ZODs should be made public:
Steve McIntyre has a must read post Stocker’s Earmarks. It addresses efforts by IPCC WG1 to circumvent the transparency objectives recommended by the IAC by inhibiting distribution of draft reports. The justification is “These could prematurely circulate in the public domain, creating confusion, and that would be a bad service of IPCC to society.” It seems that the only people interested in looking at the ZOD and FOD drafts are people that are interested in auditing the process of the IPCC assessment. I don’t encourage any participating in the IPCC as an author or reviewer to break their agreement with the IPCC. However, all of these drafts should be made public and if they are made available by whoever and however, I see no problem with discussing them publicly.
1 comment:
Actually, given the circumstances I agree, circulating the zero drafts will give the denialists more thing to quote out of context. It might also suppress free discussion about the drafts by the people involved, many of whom wouldn't want to be quoted all over the shop by denialists. Look how long the stolen email stuff went on for.
Plus on her current record, anything Curry thinks is a good idea probably isn't, and vice versa.
Post a Comment