Iain Murray on the IPCC report (I've had this one in my to-blog pile for a while):

Yet the IPCC still admits we know very little about the role of aerosols, land use changes, contrails, water vapor and solar irradiance on global temperature, so they admit they make that assertion without full knowledge of the facts.Also, gone from the Summary is the icon of the Third Assessment Report – the “hockey stick” graph.  The fact that it took two amateurs to get the scientists to realize the hole in their argument there is indicative of the state of climate science today.  The IPCC has been wrong in the past.  The fact that there’s nothing really new in this document suggests that as we learn more about the science, yes we may well find more evidence of human involvement in the climate, but when all’s said and done it won’t amount to anything to worry about.  If we go down the road of emissions suppression, however, that will be something to worry about.  We could stabilize emissions at a cost to the world of 5 percent of GDP (bear in mind that the Iraq War is costing America 0.8 percent of GDP and the world as a whole a lot less) and still have warming or we can all get richer and more resilient.  That’s really the choice on the table.