IPCC Summary for Policymakers tainted

So says Robert Stavins, co-coordinating lead author of chapter 13 of working group 3 of IPCC's 5th assessment report. He is clear that his criticism only concerns "the government approval process of the Summary for Policymakers" (SPM). And that "the Technical Summary and the 15 chapters of WG 3 -- retain their full scientific integrity," as they were "completely untouched by the government approval process of the SPM." He goes into the details of why the summary was more a political than scientific process, and that such politics is a conflict of interest to scientific integrity. And that the SPM process should be corrected. See the article for the extensive and articulate details.