claim: "However, a single scientist, Dr. Ben Santer of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, rewrote the draft at the IPCC’s request, deleting all five statements, replacing them with a single statement to the effect that a human influence on global climate was now discernible, and making some 200 consequential amendments.
evidences.evidence_id: Global Climate Coalition:57
evidences.article: Global Climate Coalition
evidences.evidence: The coalition report said that Benjamin D. Santer, the lead author of Chapter 8 in the assessment, entitled "Detection of Climate Change and Attribution of Causes," had altered the text, after acceptance by the Working Group, and without approval of the authors, to strike content characterizing the uncertainty of the science.
evidences.votes: REFUTES SUPPORTS
evidences.evidence_id: IPCC Second Assessment Report:21
evidences.article: IPCC Second Assessment Report
evidences.evidence: The Chapter 8 draft report put together on 5 October had an Executive Summary of the evidence, and after various qualifications, said "Taken together, these results point towards a human influence on climate."
evidences.votes: SUPPORTS NOT_ENOUGH_INFO
evidences.evidence_id: IPCC Second Assessment Report:29
evidences.article: IPCC Second Assessment Report
evidences.evidence: An introductory preface to the SAR written by IPCC chairman Bolin and his co-chairs John T. Houghton and L. Gylvan Meira Filho highlighted "that observations suggest 'a discernible human influence on global climate', one of the key findings of this report, adds an important new dimension to discussion of the climate issue."
evidences.votes: SUPPORTS NOT_ENOUGH_INFO
evidences.evidence_id: IPCC Second Assessment Report:30
evidences.article: IPCC Second Assessment Report
evidences.evidence: Prior to the publication of the Second Assessment Report, the industry group Global Climate Coalition distributed a report entitled "The IPCC: Institutionalized Scientific Cleansing" to reporters, US Congressmen, and scientists, which said that Santer had altered the text, after acceptance by the Working Group, and without approval of the authors, to strike content characterizing the uncertainty of the science.
evidences.votes: NOT_ENOUGH_INFO SUPPORTS
evidences.evidence_id: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change:122
evidences.article: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
evidences.evidence: The balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate (considerable progress since the 1990 report in distinguishing between natural and anthropogenic influences on climate, because of: including aerosols; coupled models; pattern-based studies) Climate is expected to continue to change in the future (increasing realism of simulations increases confidence; important uncertainties remain but are taken into account in the range of model projections) There are still many uncertainties (estimates of future emissions and biogeochemical cycling; models; instrument data for model testing, assessment of variability, and detection studies) The Third Assessment Report (TAR) was completed in 2001 and consists of four reports, three of them from its Working Groups: Working Group I: The Scientific Basis Working Group II: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability Working Group III: Mitigation Synthesis Report A number of the TAR's conclusions are given quantitative estimates of how probable it is that they are correct, e.g., greater than 66% probability of being correct.
evidences.votes: SUPPORTS NOT_ENOUGH_INFO