Review comments are open to the public for at least five years.
There are several ways to agree what goes into the reports:
The Panel controls what the IPCC agrees on to meet standards. The Panel's "approval" process has been criticized for changing what the experts put in the Reports.
Each chapter has a lot of authors who are responsible for writing and editing the material. A chapter usually has two "Coordinating" Lead Authors who control what words go in their chapter, ten to fifteen Lead Authors, and a larger number of Contributing Authors. The Lead Authors put together the work of the other authors and report to the Working Group chairs. Lead Authors write sections of chapters. Contributing Authors prepare text, graphs and data.
Authors are chosen from a list of researchers prepared by governments, other important groups, the Working Group/Task Force Bureaux, and other experts (, 4.2.1,2). The group of Coordinating Lead Authors and Lead Authors for a section or chapter of a Report is expected to have many different views and to have people from different parts of the world.
In December 2007, the IPCC was awarded The Nobel Peace Prize 2007 "for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change." The award is shared with Former U.S. Vice-President Al Gore for his work on climate change and the documentary "An Inconvenient Truth".
In January 2005 Christopher Landsea resigned from work on the IPCC AR4, saying that it was "both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound" because of Kevin Trenberth of the National Center for Atmospheric Research's idea that global warming was contributing to recent hurricane activity. Roger A. Pielke who published Landsea's letter writes: "How anyone can deny that political factors were everpresent in the negotiations isn't paying attention", but says that "Despite the pressures, on tropical cyclones they figured out a way to maintain consistency with the actual balance of opinion(s) in the community of relevant experts." He continues "So there might be a human contribution (and presumably this is just to the observed upwards trends observed in some basins, and not to downward trends observed in others, but this is unclear) but the human contribution itself has not been quantitatively assessed, yet the experts, using their judgment, expect it to be there. In plain English this is what is called a 'hypothesis' and not a 'conclusion.' And it is a fair representation of the issue."
The IPCC Third Assessment Report showed a graph labeled "Millennial Northern Hemisphere temperature reconstruction" from a paper by Mann, Bradley and Hughes (MBH98) often called the "Hockey Stick Graph". This graph was different to the IPCC First assessment report which showed global temperature for the past 1000 years, and higher temperatures during the Medieval Warm Period. The graph was thought to show that temperatures between 1000 and 1900 were very different. This was criticized in an article by Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick. In a 2006 letter to "Nature", Bradley, Hughes and Mann claimed the original article had said that they could not be exact.
Some critics say the IPCC reports underestimate dangers, understate risks, and report only the lowest risks.
On February 1, 2007, the night before publication of IPCCs report on climate, a study was published saying that temperatures and sea levels have been rising at or above the speed the IPCC reported in 2001. The study compared IPCC 2001 predictions of temperature and sea level change with what actually happened. Over the six years, the actual temperature rise was near the top end of the range given by IPCC's 2001 prediction and the actual rise was more than the top of the range the IPCC predicted.
An example of scientific research which has indicated that predictions by the IPCC have uderstated risks is a study on rises in sea levels.
Political influence on the IPCC has been shown by the release of a memo by ExxonMobil to the Bush administration, and its effects on the IPCCs leadership. The Bush administration, at the request of ExxonMobil, wanted rid of Robert Watson, a climate scientist and IPCC chairperson, and to have him replaced by Pachauri, who was seen at the time as more friendly to industry.
In 2005, the UK House of Lords Select Committee on Economic Affairs produced a report on the economics of climate change. It commented on the IPCC process:
"We have some concerns about the objectivity of the IPCC process, with some of its emissions scenarios and summary documentation apparently influenced by political considerations. There are significant doubts about some aspects of the IPCCs emissions scenario exercise, in particular, the high emissions scenarios. The Government should press the IPCC to change their approach. There are some positive aspects to global warming and these appear to have been played down in the IPCC reports; the Government should press the IPCC to reflect in a more balanced way the costs and benefits of climate change. The Government should press the IPCC for better estimates of the monetary costs of global warming damage and for explicit monetary comparisons between the costs of measures to control warming and their benefits. Since warming will continue, regardless of action now, due to the lengthy time lags.
Zimmermann Telegram
The Zimmermann Telegram (also called the Zimmermann Note) was a telegram sent to Mexico from Germany on January 16, 1917. It was what made America enter World War I. It is named for the German man who sent it, Arthur Zimmermann. Zimmermann was the German Foreign Secretary (took care of things with other countries). Zimmermann sent it to the German ambassador in the United States, Johann von Bernstorff. Bernstorff then sent it to the German ambassador in Mexico, Heinrich von Eckardt.
The telegram's message was:
The telegram told the ambassador to ask the Mexicans to join the war on the German side by attacking America. Germany promised to help Mexico take back land the United States had taken from Mexico in the Mexican–American War. These places were Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona. Germany wanted Mexico to enter the war so America would be too busy to help the enemies of Germany. Mexico was already busy with the Mexican Revolution and did not like the idea.
The British secretly got the telegram. They were able to decode the telegram. They held on to the telegram until February 24, 1917. They gave it to President Woodrow Wilson of the United States of America. President Wilson published the telegram so the people would know about it. The telegram made the American people angry. Wilson asked the United States Congress for a Declaration of war against Germany. Congress accepted the request on April 2, 1917. The United States of America announced war on Germany on April 6, 1917. Americans were already angry over German submarines sinking ships, but this telegram is what made America come into the war.
Battle of Stalingrad
The Battle of Stalingrad was fought during the Second World War between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. They were fighting for control of the city of Stalingrad. The battle was fought between 23 August 1942 and 2 February 1943. It was one of the most important battles of the war because it marked the end of Germany's advances. Hitler even blamed his defeat partly on Stalingrad. The Battle of Stalingrad has often been recorded as an example of how brutal a war can be. It is reported that, due to limited supplies, soldiers and civilians had to resort to eating rats, mice, and even cannibalism.