<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
	<rss version="2.0">
		<channel>
			<title>Green Building Forum - IPCC AR4</title>
			<lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2026 12:56:47 +0100</lastBuildDate>
			<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/</link>
			<description></description>
			<generator>Lussumo Vanilla 1.0.3</generator>
			<item>
		<title>IPCC AR4</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=247&amp;Focus=2676#Comment_2676</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=247&amp;Focus=2676#Comment_2676</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2007 08:19:41 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>biffvernon</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[IPCC WG1 AR4 Final Report is now available for download. <br /><a href="http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/wg1-report.html" target="_self" rel="nofollow">http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/wg1-report.html</a> <br /><br />For best ongoing analysis see RealClimate<br /><a href="http://www.realclimate.org/" target="_self" rel="nofollow">http://www.realclimate.org/</a>]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>IPCC AR4</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=247&amp;Focus=2814#Comment_2814</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=247&amp;Focus=2814#Comment_2814</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 May 2007 14:13:52 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>biffvernon</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[And now, fresh from Bangkok, the Group III Summary for Policymakers: <br /><br /><a href="http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM040507.pdf" target="_self" rel="nofollow">http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM040507.pdf</a>]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>IPCC AR4</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=247&amp;Focus=2817#Comment_2817</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=247&amp;Focus=2817#Comment_2817</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 May 2007 14:44:16 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>Chris Wardle</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[Just had a skim through that last link Biff.  Couldn't see any mention of TEQs except relating to industry - have I missed it?  Or the impact of Peak Oil for that matter.  Surely the people involved have considered these crucial points?]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>IPCC AR4</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=247&amp;Focus=2828#Comment_2828</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=247&amp;Focus=2828#Comment_2828</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 May 2007 18:45:40 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>biffvernon</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[Well spotted Chris.  We have a little work to do yet.]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>IPCC AR4</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=247&amp;Focus=3109#Comment_3109</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=247&amp;Focus=3109#Comment_3109</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 May 2007 20:18:25 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>Geoff Beacon</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[I don't like to criticise the work of the IPCC: Reports in the press<br />suggest they are having a hard time getting their message across <br />and fighting off many interest groups and political lobbies.<br /><br />BUT ... I have received an email from the Chief Scientist at the Met <br />Office, which concedes that the Met Office (Hadley Centre) models <br />do not have important feedback mechanisms in them, viz. the <br />feedbacks from permafrost melting in Siberia, Canada etc. Many <br />of us have seen this methane on TV ...bubbling out of Siberian lakes.<br />The Guardian had a piece in 2005 reporting the size of the Siberian <br />methane. See <br /><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,12374,1546824,00.html" target="_self" rel="nofollow">http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,12374,1546824,00.html</a><br /><br />Also the methane from river deltas does not seem to be <br />included in the models.<br /><br />This is worrying in itself because, it seems that these models <br />were used in the calculation of temperature rises predicted by<br />the IPCC.  What worries me even more is that  I have not<br />got any official source to refute those that say "There are other<br />feedbacks that  will cause accelerating climate change".  One <br />member of this club is David Wadsell. See<br /><a href="http://www.meridian.org.uk/Resources/Global%20Dynamics/Feedback%20Dynamics/index.htm" target="_self" rel="nofollow">http://www.meridian.org.uk/Resources/Global%20Dynamics/Feedback%20Dynamics/index.htm</a><br /><br />Perhaps some of you could look at his site.  I hope for feedback <br />that starts "This man is barmy because ..."<br /><br />Anyway, the Met Office email, suggests the IPCC was behind the <br />game before they published.<br /><br />I am trying to find out if our government knows.<br /><br />Did the IPCC know?]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>IPCC AR4</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=247&amp;Focus=3115#Comment_3115</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=247&amp;Focus=3115#Comment_3115</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 May 2007 21:23:10 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>Chris Wardle</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[I think you are right to be worried Geoff.  This is the scenario James Lovelock has written about in his book "The Revenge of Gaia", i.e. positive feed-backs leading to the climate moving rapidly to a much hotter equilibrium state.  It is certainly disturbing but plausible in my view.<br /><br />I think the people running the climate models are not accounting for these positive feedbacks loops because they are not well understood and hence probably can't be integrated into the models.  I think it is dangerous to assume the climate will behave in a predictable, linear way as concentrations of greenhouse gases increase.  That is why we should be preparing for the worst as well as doing everything we can to cut emissions.<br /><br />This rapid switching in global climatic conditions has happened throughout the history of the Earth, for example, when we move from a glaciation to an inter-glacial period.  We are probably now providing the trigger that will force the switch to a hot state.  Hopefully it is still not too late to pull back from the brink.]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>IPCC AR4</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=247&amp;Focus=3131#Comment_3131</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=247&amp;Focus=3131#Comment_3131</guid>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 May 2007 08:36:37 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>biffvernon</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[Yes, the IPCC reports have to be based on published science - and there's a big time lag in the publishing process - and then everyone has to aggree and then the politicians get to put their oar in, so the final reports tend to be cautious and conservative.  To see what the scientists are actually thinking in something closer to real time take a look at the blog run by Michael Mann, Gavin Schmidt,  et al. at RealClimate <br /><a href="http://www.realclimate.org/" target="_self" rel="nofollow">http://www.realclimate.org/</a><br />This is far and away the most authoritative place on the net to start looking for climate science.]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	
		</channel>
	</rss>