Good BI will do little to help us get to the truth, because the truth doesn't matter very much. The IPCC is not a scientific organization, it is a political organization.

Something as important as the future of mankind oughtn't be relegated to politics. Unfortunately, good science is taking a back seat to--no, getting stuffed into the trunk--when it comes to the political agendas being promulgated by devotees of global warming.

Here are two interesting articles. The first is a review of the scientific literature:

Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide

http://www.michaelcrichton.com/speech-ourenvironmentalfuture.html

The next is by the late, great scientist, physician, author, & producer Michael Crichton:

The Case for Skepticism on Global Warming

http://www.petitionproject.org/gwdatabase/GW_Article/GWReview_OISM600.pdf

I invite you to print it in color & read it carefully. In this article, Crichton asks:

Is global warming happening?

Is it anthropogenic?

Can we do anything about it?

Should we?

The abstract: Crichton's "detailed explanation of why he criticizes global warming scenarios. Using published UN data, he reviews why claims for catastrophic warming arouse doubt; why reducing CO2 is vastly more difficult than we are being told; and why we are morally unjustified to spend vast sums on this speculative issue when around the world people are dying of starvation and disease."

To those who think the global financial crisis is serious, or those in the US who are aware of the pending Social Security & Medicare crises, all three combined pale in comparison to the cost of remediating so-called global warming.