Report author commissioned by Donald Trump speaks out amidst uproar

In a recent turn of events, a climate change report co-authored by Ross McKitrick, a professor at the University of Guelph in Ontario, has sparked outrage among 85 climate scientists. The scientists, led by Andrew Dessler, a professor of atmospheric sciences at Texas A&M University, have published a 484-page document to strongly condemn the method and conclusions of the report.

The report, commissioned by the Trump administration's Energy Department, is 151 pages long and was written by five authors, including McKitrick. However, it's important to note that McKitrick has not examined marine heatwaves and has not expressed an opinion on them.

The report has not undergone external peer review, a standard practice in the scientific community. This has led some, like Vincent Larivière, a specialist in the modes of production and dissemination of scientific and technological knowledge, to describe the report as "a political report rather than a scientific one."

Andrew Dessler, a spokesperson for the group of 85 scientists, states that the authors of the report do not represent the dominant view in climate science. He goes on to compare the purpose of the Trump administration's report to that of tobacco manufacturers in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, aiming to create confusion to prevent regulation.

Ross McKitrick, in response, defends that the goal of the report was not to minimize risks, but to ensure that the full range of historical data and scientific information is accessible to the public, especially on subjects that have long-standing disagreements in the academic literature. He disagrees with certain conclusions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), particularly those made by Working Group 2 (WG2) of the IPCC.

In Chapter 6 of the report he co-authored, McKitrick refers to the IPCC's generalizations and concludes that most extreme weather phenomena do not show any statistically significant long-term trends compared to available historical data.

The University of Guelph, where McKitrick is a professor, defends academic freedom for professors and researchers but emphasizes that it does not independently verify each research document. The university's statement also notes that the conclusions of the DOE report reflect the opinions of its authors, not those of the University of Guelph.

It's worth mentioning that since taking office, the Trump administration has taken several actions that impact climate policy research in the US. These actions include firing climate researchers, banning certain words in scientific articles, cutting funding for environmental research, threatening to withdraw financial aid from universities, and removing scientific reports from government websites, among other actions.

The study on US climate policy published last week was not explicitly detailed in the search results concerning its initiators or financiers. However, climate policy research in the US is currently impacted by political actions from the Trump administration and involves universities and researchers like Ken Alex at UC Berkeley. No direct funding source for the latest study was identified in the available information.

Interestingly, the report co-authored by McKitrick cites only 284 studies, in contrast to the first and second GIECC reports, which cite 60,000 scientific studies. This discrepancy has raised questions about the comprehensiveness of the report.

The climate change report questions the increase in the frequency and intensity of natural disasters and concludes that climate change is "less economically damaging than believed" and that it is "a challenge, not a catastrophe." This conclusion has been met with strong opposition from the scientific community, as evidenced by the 85-scientist rebuttal.

As the debate continues, it's clear that the report co-authored by Ross McKitrick has ignited a heated discussion about the role of politics in climate science and the importance of peer-reviewed research in shaping public policy.