Original sentence: Three key clauses-- expressing the consensus of authors, contributors, and reviewers-- should have been placed into the Summary instead of being deleted from the approved draft chapter
Edited sentence: 60% of respondents also thought that the climate models used did not accurately represent the physical atmosphere-ocean system.The IPCC report and its authors are being (mis)used by politicians and others to push an ideologically based agenda.The ambiguous phrase "the balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate" has been (mis)interpreted by policymakers to mean that a major global warming catastrophe will soon be upon us;.The responses also showed that the majority of respondents thought that models had not been adequately validated with observational data, and that attribution of observed warming to an enhanced greenhouse effect had not been shown using only observational data.The responses showed that 40% of the IPCC group did not agree with the IPCC FAR summary, and felt that it might convey a misleading message to the public with its emphasis on the certainty about the natural greenhouse effect.Three key clauses-- expressing the consensus of authors, contributors, and reviewers-- should have been placed into the Summary instead of being deleted from the approved draft chapter;