Frasier Institute Gets Prebunked

Via Robert, Desmogblog has the goods on the Fraser² Institute's objective¹ assessment on the IPCC's next report, a week before they were planning to release it. Hilarious. Desmogblog has all the details but I can I give you my own short version of the Fraser report:

OK, sure, all the world's leading scientists got together and spent years hammering out their best efforts at at a clear comprehensive summary of the status of the issue, but never mind all that, the objective analysts assembled by the Fraser Institute will re-interpret it for you in order to make it more biasedclear. For example, while the IPCC authors may state that they have compelling evidence that dangerous and/or unprecedented changes are underway, the Institute helpfully summarizes the IPCC report by stating that, "There is no compelling evidence that dangerous or unprecedented changes are underway."

Actually, they should use the Fraser report in 'critical reading' classes, it's a great example of propaganda. Clever enough to be worthwhile for a lesson but not so clever that students who look closely won't pick up most of the tricks at work.

----
¹Probability that the Fraser Institute thinks that the IPCC is understating the risks of global warming: 0% Correlation between this probability and the contents of the IPCC report: 0%

----
²For some reason I always want to write "Frasier" institute, instead of "Fraser" institute, perhaps that's because Frasier Crane was a comedian who nobody took seriously, I don't know.