Your comment implies that the IPCC panel started with an idea of what conclusion they wanted to make. What is your evidence that's the case.<p>It's entirely invalid to say that because they came to a certain conclusion and the majority of the cited studies support that conclusion, they picked the citations to support it. That claim can be applied to <i>any valid</i> scientific review. It uses some sort of Catch-22 argument that because the evidence support the conclusion, the evidence must have been cherry-picked. With that view, no science would be valid.<p>Besides, your comment doesn't make sense. What about all the anecdotal evidence from non-scientific sources that <i>do</i> support their thesis but <i>was</i> excluded from the report?<p>Without assessing the rates of the complementary claims, your statement just looks like good, old-fashioned selection bias.