{"id":441863,"date":"2026-04-29T08:10:31","date_gmt":"2026-04-29T15:10:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=441863"},"modified":"2026-04-29T08:10:34","modified_gmt":"2026-04-29T15:10:34","slug":"frustrating-and-disappointing-ipcc-leaves-bangkok-without-ar7-roadmap","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=441863","title":{"rendered":"“Frustrating and Disappointing”: IPCC Leaves Bangkok Without AR7 Roadmap"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

The IPCC’s 64th Plenary Session<\/strong> took place in Bangkok, Thailand<\/strong>, from March 24\u201327, 2026<\/strong>, at the UNESCAP headquarters. Nearly 300 delegates from member governments and observers attended to advance the Seventh Assessment Report (AR7) <\/strong>cycle, discuss the 2026 workplan for the three Working Groups, and review the organization’s Principles and Procedures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The session wrapped up without a firm decision on the timeline for the AR7 reports<\/strong> (the three Working Group contributions plus Synthesis Report). Governments remained divided: some pushed for a schedule aligned with UNFCCC milestones like the 2028 Global Stocktake, while others (notably including positions from countries like Saudi Arabia and India in related discussions) advocated considering delays. Independent coverage described the meeting as “frustrating and disappointing<\/strong>,” with a “deadlock” on the timeline and “persistent divergence of views.” This lack of agreement at this stage of the cycle appears unprecedented according to observers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Additional flashpoints included:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Review of IPCC procedures:<\/strong> Discussions on governance rules were contentious and largely deferred to a future session.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Funding concerns: <\/strong>IPCC Chair Jim Skea warned of a budget shortfall. Contributions have declined (notably with reduced or altered U.S. involvement under the current administration), and without fresh funding or significant cost cuts, the Trust Fund could run out by 2028\u2014before AR7 completion. This has been linked in reporting to broader shifts in U.S. climate policy priorities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This isn’t the first IPCC plenary with friction<\/strong>\u2014government approval of Summaries for Policymakers has long involved line-by-line negotiations that can dilute or emphasize certain findings. The funding gap and U.S. policy shift add practical pressure. Critics argue it underscores how the IPCC operates at the science-policy interface<\/strong>, where “best available science”<\/strong> inevitably collides with economic, developmental, and sovereignty priorities of 195+ member governments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The next major session is slated for Addis Ababa in October 2026<\/strong>. In the meantime, author work continues, but the Bangkok outcome leaves the overall AR7 roadmap uncertain.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

_____________________________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n\n\n\n

IPCC Troubles: The Latest from Bangkok<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

From Master Resource<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By Robert Bradley Jr.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cThis is the fifth consecutive failed attempt\u2026. UNEP warns the IPCC trust fund may run out before AR7 is even finished. What we are watching is \u2026 a slow-motion erosion of the institution that translates climate science into political accountability \u2014 and it is happening at the moment that science is most needed.\u201d \u2013 Jozef Pecho, IPCC climate scientist (below)<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

There is trouble in IPCC-land where the next (Seventh) assessment<\/a>, due out in late 2029 (COP 34), is behind schedule with uncertain prospects.[1]<\/strong> Chalk up another setback to the Big Problem of trying to control the climate via anti-CO2 policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Climate modeler Jozef Pecho<\/a>, advertising himself as \u201cpredicting floods, protecting lives,\u201d is concerned that the IPCC research-and-publication process is in trouble. \u201cAs a climate scientist whose work depends on IPCC assessments,\u201d he reported<\/a>, \u201cI find what\u2019s happening in Bangkok hard to watch.\u201d He is referring to the just-concluded Sixty-fourth Session of the IPCC (IPCC-64) in Bangkok, Thailand (March 24-27, 2026).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pecho continues:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

For the fifth time in a row, member countries failed to agree on a publication timeline for the Seventh Assessment Report (AR7). The IPCC Chair Jim Skea called the 64th session \u201cfrustrating and disappointing\u201d with \u201cminimal outcomes.\u201d Carbon Brief\u2019s reporting is essential reading.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The disagreement is framed as procedural. It isn\u2019t. Most countries want AR7 finished in time for the second Global Stocktake at COP33 \u2014 exactly what the IPCC was built to do: feed authoritative science into political checkpoints. A coalition including Saudi Arabia, Russia, China, India and Kenya wants the timeline pushed later. The practical effect is the same as if you delayed a medical diagnosis until after the surgery: the science arrives, but it can no longer guide the decision.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Continuing:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

This is the fifth consecutive failed attempt. Saudi Arabia has also blocked the recording of delegate names in official meeting reports. Three previous session reports remain unapproved over transparency disputes. UNEP [United Nations Environmental Program<\/a>] warns the IPCC trust fund may run out before AR7 is even finished.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

What we are watching is not a calendar dispute. It is a slow-motion erosion of the institution that translates climate science into political accountability \u2014 and it is happening at the moment that science is most needed.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Pecho ended:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

I rely on AR6 chapters every week for my work on European climate impacts. The thought that AR7 might land after the political decisions it was meant to inform is not an abstraction. It is a direct attack on the value of the work my entire field does.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The next IPCC session is in Addis Ababa in October 2026. There is still time. But pretending this is normal is part of the problem.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Comment<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Forcing scientific consensus to fit a political narrative is now in big trouble. Climategate<\/a> back in 2009 lifted the curtain on IPCC-insider scientists cheating to help \u201cthe cause\u201d (a Michael Mann term). Sound science in the voluminous body of the report just dies with the politicized Summary for Policymakers being as alarmist as it can be. The whole IPCC process, begun in 1988 with the First Assessment released in 1990, was never intended to find carbon dioxide (CO2) and other manmade greenhouse gases innocent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The comments on Pecho\u2019s post were brutal. \u201cAll suggests a final collapse of the house of cards. For good, I\u2019d say,\u201d said<\/a> one. \u201cIt\u2019s amazing this scam has gone on for so long,\u201d said<\/a> another. And<\/a>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Jozef, I almost totally agree with your statement: \u201cAs a climate scientist whose work depends on IPCC assessments, I find what\u2019s happening in Bangkok hard to watch.\u201d The climate science and models used by the IPCC and their apocalyptic CO2\/GHG effect are comical.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Another called out<\/a> the base case RCP8.5., which<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u2026 was so far away from reality that people just stopped talking about it and moved on because it was an embarrassment. Actual science would have reviewed the model, identified why it failed and been taken seriously as it improved on the model. Instead, it was quietly dismissed and the next version with the most alarming and catastrophic predictions takes the stage. People realize this isn\u2019t and never has been science, it is propaganda dressed up as science in order to take advantage of perceived authority. Which is why fewer and fewer people are paying attention to it.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

I added: \u201cTime to end the charade and to apologize for trying to force a \u2018consensus\u2019 for what Michael \u2018Climategate\u2019 Mann called<\/a> \u2018the cause.’\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But when will the Deep Ecologists and authoritarians-in-their-head show some humility toward climate models and climate control? Respect consumers and taxpayers? Value freedom over open-ended Statism?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014-<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[1] The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has greenlighted<\/a> the next round of analysis: \u201c\u2026 the IPCC will produce the three Working Group contributions to the Seventh Assessment Report, namely the Working Group I report on the Physical Science Basis, the Working Group II report on Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability and the Working Group III report on Mitigation of Climate Change.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The IPCC’s 64th Plenary Session took place in Bangkok, Thailand, from March 24\u201327, 2026, at the UNESCAP headquarters. Nearly 300 delegates from member governments and observers attended to advance the Seventh Assessment Report (AR7) cycle, discuss the 2026 workplan for the three Working Groups, and review the organization’s Principles and Procedures.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":441864,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691842641,691842636,691842640,691842637,691842638,691818149,691837622],"class_list":{"0":"post-441863","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-best-available-science","9":"tag-2029-cop-34","10":"tag-climate-modeler-jozef-pecho","11":"tag-frustrating-and-disappointing","12":"tag-funding-concerns","13":"tag-scientific-consensus","14":"tag-seventh-assessment-report-ar7","16":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/0-generate-an-image-Frustrating-and-Disappointing-IPCCs-Bangkok-Plenary-Ends-in-Total-Failure-on-AR7-Roadmap4.jpeg?fit=816%2C1440&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1QWP","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":397419,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=397419","url_meta":{"origin":441863,"position":0},"title":"A Takeover of the IPCC","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"08\/24\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has just released the\u00a0names of its authors\u00a0for its seventh assessment report (AR7). The author list for its Chapter 3 \u2014\u00a0Changes in regional climate and extremes, and their causes\u00a0\u2014 suggests strongly that the IPCC will be shifting from its longstanding focus on detection and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"\u201cExtreme event attribution\u201d (EEA)\"","block_context":{"text":"\u201cExtreme event attribution\u201d (EEA)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=extreme-event-attribution-eea-2"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/0AQN8E73mBIeJ79BE64oOwpgHrEoSyrULkNvH71IBO_mZ-qC9TT56xklCfqmbKBgyyUuH0SiFQnL0RA97mkkP-gt4iwKb3cGby9hHl1IrYhMenazzDXdlq4RY91HfC4fLWJZVAxkCgmGcMTsLCwfKPZDwSEAaCA-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/0AQN8E73mBIeJ79BE64oOwpgHrEoSyrULkNvH71IBO_mZ-qC9TT56xklCfqmbKBgyyUuH0SiFQnL0RA97mkkP-gt4iwKb3cGby9hHl1IrYhMenazzDXdlq4RY91HfC4fLWJZVAxkCgmGcMTsLCwfKPZDwSEAaCA-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/0AQN8E73mBIeJ79BE64oOwpgHrEoSyrULkNvH71IBO_mZ-qC9TT56xklCfqmbKBgyyUuH0SiFQnL0RA97mkkP-gt4iwKb3cGby9hHl1IrYhMenazzDXdlq4RY91HfC4fLWJZVAxkCgmGcMTsLCwfKPZDwSEAaCA-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/0AQN8E73mBIeJ79BE64oOwpgHrEoSyrULkNvH71IBO_mZ-qC9TT56xklCfqmbKBgyyUuH0SiFQnL0RA97mkkP-gt4iwKb3cGby9hHl1IrYhMenazzDXdlq4RY91HfC4fLWJZVAxkCgmGcMTsLCwfKPZDwSEAaCA-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/0AQN8E73mBIeJ79BE64oOwpgHrEoSyrULkNvH71IBO_mZ-qC9TT56xklCfqmbKBgyyUuH0SiFQnL0RA97mkkP-gt4iwKb3cGby9hHl1IrYhMenazzDXdlq4RY91HfC4fLWJZVAxkCgmGcMTsLCwfKPZDwSEAaCA-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":335311,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=335311","url_meta":{"origin":441863,"position":1},"title":"Global CO2 Emissions are Tracking Well Below the Climate Scenarios Used to Scare People","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"07\/02\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"One of the main complaints rational people have had about global warming projections is that the \u201cbaseline\u201d scenarios assumed for future CO2 emissions are well above what is realistic. As Roger Pielke, Jr, has been pointing out for years, the U.N. IPCC continues to make these exaggerated scenarios a high\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"AR5 RCP scenarios\"","block_context":{"text":"AR5 RCP scenarios","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=ar5-rcp-scenarios"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/428cb5e678da63e8f316391bc0d6116d-1.jpg?fit=1200%2C695&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/428cb5e678da63e8f316391bc0d6116d-1.jpg?fit=1200%2C695&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/428cb5e678da63e8f316391bc0d6116d-1.jpg?fit=1200%2C695&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/428cb5e678da63e8f316391bc0d6116d-1.jpg?fit=1200%2C695&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/428cb5e678da63e8f316391bc0d6116d-1.jpg?fit=1200%2C695&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":367518,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=367518","url_meta":{"origin":441863,"position":2},"title":"Trump\u2019s Juggernaut Smashes the BBC\u2019s Climate Crystal Ball","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"02\/25\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Six weeks ago, the BBC\u2019s climate soothsayers were gazing into 2025 with their trademark blend of gloom and green idealism. Their January 7 piece, \u201cFrom Trump to a \u2018Game-Changing\u2019 Lawsuit: Seven Big Climate and Nature Moments Coming in 2025,\u201d sketched a year of UN lawsuits, lofty CO2 targets, and global\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"BBC\"","block_context":{"text":"BBC","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=bbc"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/F57CXhiWMAAl-ym.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/F57CXhiWMAAl-ym.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/F57CXhiWMAAl-ym.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/F57CXhiWMAAl-ym.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/F57CXhiWMAAl-ym.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":398682,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=398682","url_meta":{"origin":441863,"position":3},"title":"Beware Claims Attributing Extreme Events to\u00a0Hydrocarbons","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"08\/29\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has just released the names of its authors for its seventh assessment report (AR7). The author list for its Chapter 3 \u2014 Changes in regional climate and extremes, and their causes \u2014 suggests strongly that the IPCC will be shifting from its longstanding\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate Central (CC)\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate Central (CC)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-central-cc"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/AQMftlemxtqUzUpTqSFddzeJWDW3keQOeviRYVZp6kR0_N5EBF5gUWScpL1rcnrzL8llPbZLH_v_0EQCJsm5RCBaK4MLIZ9d1KNnLmW_UlTRRr8aIShnwpZX-Vmdvog_17wn8BQPVmelV9Ey2fK_A7IGIAhTHQ.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/AQMftlemxtqUzUpTqSFddzeJWDW3keQOeviRYVZp6kR0_N5EBF5gUWScpL1rcnrzL8llPbZLH_v_0EQCJsm5RCBaK4MLIZ9d1KNnLmW_UlTRRr8aIShnwpZX-Vmdvog_17wn8BQPVmelV9Ey2fK_A7IGIAhTHQ.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/AQMftlemxtqUzUpTqSFddzeJWDW3keQOeviRYVZp6kR0_N5EBF5gUWScpL1rcnrzL8llPbZLH_v_0EQCJsm5RCBaK4MLIZ9d1KNnLmW_UlTRRr8aIShnwpZX-Vmdvog_17wn8BQPVmelV9Ey2fK_A7IGIAhTHQ.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/AQMftlemxtqUzUpTqSFddzeJWDW3keQOeviRYVZp6kR0_N5EBF5gUWScpL1rcnrzL8llPbZLH_v_0EQCJsm5RCBaK4MLIZ9d1KNnLmW_UlTRRr8aIShnwpZX-Vmdvog_17wn8BQPVmelV9Ey2fK_A7IGIAhTHQ.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/AQMftlemxtqUzUpTqSFddzeJWDW3keQOeviRYVZp6kR0_N5EBF5gUWScpL1rcnrzL8llPbZLH_v_0EQCJsm5RCBaK4MLIZ9d1KNnLmW_UlTRRr8aIShnwpZX-Vmdvog_17wn8BQPVmelV9Ey2fK_A7IGIAhTHQ.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":424797,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=424797","url_meta":{"origin":441863,"position":4},"title":"The Risks of AR7: Ed Miliband\u2019s Poison Pill","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"02\/05\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"AR7 refers to the UK's Allocation Round 7 of the Contracts for Difference (CfD) scheme, a government auction process for subsidizing renewable energy projects, primarily offshore wind. It is a key part of Energy Secretary Ed Miliband's push for \"clean power by 2030\" under the Labour government. Ed Miliband\u2019s \"poison\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"\u201cpoison pill\u201d\"","block_context":{"text":"\u201cpoison pill\u201d","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=poison-pill"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Screenshot-2026-02-05-185403.png?fit=1188%2C909&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Screenshot-2026-02-05-185403.png?fit=1188%2C909&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Screenshot-2026-02-05-185403.png?fit=1188%2C909&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Screenshot-2026-02-05-185403.png?fit=1188%2C909&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Screenshot-2026-02-05-185403.png?fit=1188%2C909&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":397652,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=397652","url_meta":{"origin":441863,"position":5},"title":"Pielke Jr. \u2013A Takeover of the IPCC","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"08\/25\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Roger Pielke Jr.\u2019s\u00a0\u201cA Takeover of the IPCC\u201d\u00a0offers a timely post-mortem on what\u2019s left of scientific rigor in the world\u2019s most influential climate assessment body, of which Pielke Jr. has long been a supporter. The article chronicles not just a change in personnel at the IPCC, but a seismic shift in\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"\u201cExtreme event attribution\u201d (EEA)\"","block_context":{"text":"\u201cExtreme event attribution\u201d (EEA)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=extreme-event-attribution-eea-2"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/AQMj8yHR8Be8RHSFGKLFy_bflKmAnzt8LM1X7piKEL-2ElU5jZObEOU6HGGBGI1E2OSwUBxyA7Arc4WJhfFb9P6XGZu9UVClDsD0gxlikkhHBUYvuFviW7TVKMhjRH4de4-fyUz9zWF8pT6BR0uNlanT4P2Wpg.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/AQMj8yHR8Be8RHSFGKLFy_bflKmAnzt8LM1X7piKEL-2ElU5jZObEOU6HGGBGI1E2OSwUBxyA7Arc4WJhfFb9P6XGZu9UVClDsD0gxlikkhHBUYvuFviW7TVKMhjRH4de4-fyUz9zWF8pT6BR0uNlanT4P2Wpg.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/AQMj8yHR8Be8RHSFGKLFy_bflKmAnzt8LM1X7piKEL-2ElU5jZObEOU6HGGBGI1E2OSwUBxyA7Arc4WJhfFb9P6XGZu9UVClDsD0gxlikkhHBUYvuFviW7TVKMhjRH4de4-fyUz9zWF8pT6BR0uNlanT4P2Wpg.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/AQMj8yHR8Be8RHSFGKLFy_bflKmAnzt8LM1X7piKEL-2ElU5jZObEOU6HGGBGI1E2OSwUBxyA7Arc4WJhfFb9P6XGZu9UVClDsD0gxlikkhHBUYvuFviW7TVKMhjRH4de4-fyUz9zWF8pT6BR0uNlanT4P2Wpg.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/AQMj8yHR8Be8RHSFGKLFy_bflKmAnzt8LM1X7piKEL-2ElU5jZObEOU6HGGBGI1E2OSwUBxyA7Arc4WJhfFb9P6XGZu9UVClDsD0gxlikkhHBUYvuFviW7TVKMhjRH4de4-fyUz9zWF8pT6BR0uNlanT4P2Wpg.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/441863","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=441863"}],"version-history":[{"count":10,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/441863\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":441875,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/441863\/revisions\/441875"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/441864"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=441863"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=441863"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=441863"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}