CUKI: to je summary for policymakers, odkazy jsou tam vsude, ale aby to bylo kratsi, tak ty jsou uvedeny v tech plnejch reportech a v summary for policymakers je na ne uvedenej jenom odkaz. Stejne jsou u vsech kapitol uvedeny autori. popisky jsou u vsech grafu nebo ti mozna nerozumim, kdyztak dej screenshot, co presne myslis, by me zajimalo.
AR6 vysla jenom prvni cast (fyzikalni podstata klimatickych zmen, dalsi dve budou vychazet postupne, zaverecna zprava vyjde az v zari pristiho roku).
Jinak proces psani Summary for policymakers je znacne slozitej, popsanej je na wiki treba:
"Before the end of this period, a selection of about 50 scientists within each Working Group produces a first draft "Summary for policymakers" (SPM) summarizing its section of the full assessment report. This first draft SPM is sent for comments to the participating government. Comments are taken into account in a second draft prepared by the scientists. When the full assessment report is finalized, each second draft SPM is then reviewed during a four days plenary session comprising government delegations and observer organizations.[3] Each reviewing session is chaired by the scientists chairing the Working Group, surrounded by a panel of scientists. The government delegations usually consist of one to six delegates, comprising generally a mix of national experts (some of which are part of the IPCC) and a few diplomats or other non-scientist civil servants.
The objective of the review session is to improve the form of the SPM, which must remain faithful to the scientific content of the full assessment report.[citation needed] This process also results in some form of endorsement by the participating governments.
For the Fourth Assessment SPMs, each review lasted three days. The beginning of the first day was open to journalists and started with introductory speeches (from the IPCC President, local politicians...). Then each sentence of the draft SPM, displayed on a giant screen, was discussed at length by the delegates and often ended up completely rewritten. Some paragraphs were removed and others are added, under the full control of the Chair and its panel of scientist who ensured that every sentence strictly conforms to the content of the full assessment. When the discussion on a sentence lasted too long, a subgroup chaired by a scientist was formed to craft aside a revised text for later submission to the plenary. Generally the process was very slow at the beginning: in some cases, as little as a few paragraphs were reviewed at the end of the first day. The review generally ended late in the night of the third day - sometimes even in the next morning. On the fourth day, the reviewed SPM was released during a closing session open to journalists."
Jo a taky tam mas ty informace o nejistotach ve vede a v celym reportu se u vsech klicovejch poznatku pise s jakou pravdepodobnosti jsou (tolik k tomu tvymu "ze IPCC predklada jako jedinou pravdu bez nejistot":
"In the Synthesis Report, the certainty in key assessment findings is communicated as in the Working Group Reports and Special Reports. It is based on the author teams’ evaluations of underlying scientific understanding and is expressed as a qualitative level of confidence (from very low to very high) and, when possible, probabilistically with a quantified likelihood (from exceptionally unlikely to virtually certain). Where appropriate, findings are also formulated as statements of fact without using uncertainty qualifiers."