The IPCC's Fatal Founding Flaws

© Brown
John McLean is an Information Technology specialist who has made an intense study of climate matters since 2003.  He brings skills in analysis and data processing to a data-intensive subject.  His critical review of CSIRO climate reports, published in Energy & Environment, was a first for Australia and his analysis of the peer review of the latest IPCC assessment report has been raised in the US senate.  His website contains a number of articles about climate, with emphasis on data rather than opinion.

John's latest piece for Quadrant on Line exams the founding of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (Link)

The IPCC's fatal founding flaw

The media at large and the public that the media influences seem to believe that the IPCC is an international authority on all aspects of climate.  This is a popular but false notion.  The IPCC is, in fact, no more than a craftily assembled government-supported lobby group, doing what lobby groups usually do.
John first looks at their charter and how it gives the game away.
The role of the IPCC is to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation."
Or, put more simply, the IPCC is to report on the magnitude of man-made climate change and what can be done to reduce its impact, the existence of man-made climate change being assumed from the outset.
John exams the history behind the founding  of the IPCC and the first founding flaw -
The IPCC was not established to investigate why temperatures were rising because the ICSU, UNEP and WMO figured they already knew that it was the work of dastardly humans. 
The IPCC's task is to create reports that summarise the current level of knowledge on climate matters. To do this it relies heavily on "peer-reviewed and internationally available literature".
Sceptics are often falsely accused of cherry-picking data. The IPCC's charter however orders it to cherry pick.
The IPCC can hardly be accused of cherry-picking to support the claim of significant man-made warming when its very charter directs it to focus exclusively on that subject.
Remember that the "I" in IPCC stands for Intergovernmental.
In typical UN fashion, government representatives are dragged in to give the literature review, which is basically all the IPCC assessment reports are, the formal seal of approval.  Governments of the world thereby implicitly endorse the flawed assumption on which the IPCC was created, after which representatives unelected by you and I sign off on the reports' findings.
The scary part is that the most of the population believe that the IPCC is a scientific organisation looking at all the science affecting climate. John finishes with:
In the absence of a global agency we can only watch the IPCC's acolytes, the media, the CSIRO, the Australian Climate Commission and others faithfully reproduce, without challenge, the latest utterances from the lobbyist organization as if it is that global authority.