This opposing view is from Fred Pearce "science" journalist from the Guardian and "New Scientist". Fred is going out to lay the foundation for the next publication of the IPCC report, he thinks that........“Climate scientists back off predicting rate of warming: ‘The more we know the less we can be sure of,’ says UN panel.”
As climate science advances, forecasts are likely to become less - not more - precise making it more difficult to convince the public of the reality of climate change.
I think I can predict right now the headlines that will follow publication of the next report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), due in 2013. “Climate scientists back off predicting rate of warming: ‘The more we know the less we can be sure of,’ says UN panel.”
That is almost bound to be the drift if two-time IPCC lead author Kevin Trenberth and others are right about what is happening to the new generation of climate models. And with public trust in climate science on the slide after the various scandals of the past year over emails and a mistaken forecast of Himalayan ice loss, it hardly seems likely scientists will be treated kindly.
It may not matter much who is in charge at the IPCC by then: whether or not current chairman Rajendra Pachauri keeps his job, the reception will be rough. And if climate negotiators have still failed to do a deal to replace the Kyoto Protocol, which lapses at the end of 2012, the fallout will not be pretty, either diplomatically or climatically.
Clearly, concerns about how climate scientists handle complex issues of scientific uncertainty are set to escalate. They were highlighted in a report about IPCC procedures published in late August in response to growing criticism about IPCC errors. The report highlighted distortions and exaggerations in IPCC reports, many of which involved not correctly representing uncertainty about specific predictions.
Click source to red FULL report by Fred Pearce (I never expected to say that at this blog)