11 March 2010    Ignoring the Actual Balance of Views on PPP vs.
MER       The Summary for Policy Makers of WG3 reads as follows:
On p. 181:  On p. 183:        TripodGirl said...  Dr. Tol,  Let
me see if I understand this correctly. In round one, there were
11 protests from IPCC peer reviewers regarding a particular
point. In round 2, there were 16 protests.  These were all
overlooked/overruled and the IPCC authors carried on as though
nothing was amiss, writing what they had intended to write from
the outset.  For a final flourish, an IPCC author responded to a
peer review comment authored by you by declaring that your paper
says something rather at odds with what you say it says. (All
the while referring to you in the third person.)  How edifying.
Richard Tol said...  Correct. There are five peer-reviewed,
model-based papers that side with Castles and Henderson. There
are zero peer-reviewed, model-based papers that side with IPCC
SRES. Yet, IPCC AR4 concludes that IPCC SRES was fine. Despite
protests by t