"Many of the comments by the reviewers are strongly critical of claims contained in the final report, and they are directly at odds with the so-called "scientific consensus" touted by Gore and others calling for immediate government action." -Tom Swiss :via S02.
"Claims" is one of the problems with this statement, but....
...and Gore represents only a small portion of the scientific consensus, so don't link those two that closely.
Those comments show that there is not a conspiricy to promote GW. I'd be suspicious if there weren't "critical" comments, "at odds" with points from the report. They look very fair and balanced to me.
I especially enjoyed the comments where the authors couldn't understand what the reviewer was trying to say.
Look at 9-199 (not an example of the above, but...) a very interesting point about CO2. This is from someone who had some comments rejected as being too much against the majority.
*can i say that legally?*
Anyway, if you look at those comments and replies, this "newsland-heartbusters" stuff looks pretty lame. IMHO
~SA
