I was arguing yesterday on a YouTube video ad for The Galileo Movement called "Ax the Tax" when this guy started posting this long list of statements from "IPCC exper reviewers" whom do not agree with the IPCC.  

I googled around and found the source of the quotes at Climate Realists.  So, I took the next step to start going through the list and came upon this quote from John Christy...

3. Dr John Christy: "Little known to the public is the fact that most of the scientists involved with the IPCC do not agree that global warming is occurring. Its findings have been consistently misrepresented and/or politicized with each succeeding report."

That just didn't seem right that Christy, much less "most of the scientists involved with the IPCC," would disagree that global warming was occurring...  So, I looked up Dr Christy's email address and got this back from him within about half an hour.

Rob:

This quote is new to me.  I suspect something is incorrect such as insertion of "not" since most of the IPCC scientists agree that warming is occurring (as I've noted many times.)

My PR fellow has communicated with the proprietors of the website for a correction, but I don't know where that stands.

Attached is my recent congressional testimony in which I discuss climate change.

John C.

They also have this quote from Andy Lacis...

26. Dr. Andrew Lacis: "There is no scientific merit to be found in the Executive Summary. The presentation sounds like something put together by Greenpeace activists and their legal department."

There's a growing trend in ultra right-wing circles to make stuff up and to tell outright lies.  

Yes, I agree.  And I think there is an opportunity here to point this out to those guys in the middle.  Right now the Dr Pielke's of the world think Anthony Watts is "dedicated to an accurate presentation of the science."  But those of us who get over there more than Pielke does know quite different.

There could be value in picking up on these sorts of blatant lies and politely directing them to the attention of the more middle-of-the-road folks.

If this happened enough it might start to shake their faith in what is happening on the far right fringe of the debate.

Maybe not but nothing ventured, nothing gained.

The Lacis quote is accurate.  His intent isn't at all the way the quote sounds though.  I think he was saying the statements in the Summary for Policymakers were too vague or imprecise or something like that - I don't recall offhand.  The quote itself is right, but it doesn't mean what the people using it think it means.

Nice of Christy to email you his crappy congressional testimony :-P

Dana...  Yeah, I thought that was funny too.  I wrote back to tell him that I was very familiar with his positions on climate change but I appreciated his responding to the quote.

I've gone through about the entire list of names and quotes.  The headline of the piece is "Fifty IPCC Experts Expose Washington Post Global Warming Lies."  A large number of the quotes are completely out of context.  Many of those quoted are those who believe that AGW is real.  Maybe half are pretty genuine but I guess saying "twenty-five experts..." doesn't quite have the same impact as 50.

I mean, you REALLY have to be hitting rock bottom if you actually have to completely alter one of Christy's quotes to fit your narrative.