IPCC authors and scientists and others with relevant expertise who regularly publish in the peer-reviewed literature were invited.
I personally think the IPCC makes a mistake by not opening these meetings to outside observers, as I think the IPCC benefits from maximum openness and transparency. Unfortunately, IPCC policy probably isn't as good as it should be in this area. ___________________________________________________ Ken Caldeira Carnegie Institution Dept of Global Ecology 260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA +1 650 704 7212 [email protected] http://dge.stanford.edu/labs/caldeiralab @kencaldeira On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 12:23 AM, Andrew Lockley <[email protected]>wrote: > Actually I think that's pretty sensible. > > Why not let civil society groups in? Why not bring more ethics and social > science experts in, maybe in a separate session? > > We don't want to look like a bunch of mad scientists. The history of > scientists crossing over into social policy is hardly glorious. Think > eugenics. > > Best to be seen to be transparent > > A > On 15 Jun 2011 03:57, "Michael Hayes" <[email protected]> wrote: > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "geoengineering" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
