conclusions, they extend their window for what literature is acceptable for consideration if there s a paper they thinkpt a p and they ignore papers that don t. ig patrick michaels experienced the ipcc s bias firsthand. they initially said theyid would keep a paper of mine out even if they had to redefine what the peer review literature was. so they were bound and determine to have a point of view come through, and they succeeded. the su ippc s reputation has also come under fire for a series of errors contained ines its reports. the interesting thing abouthe those errors is they all point in the same direction toward creating a a problem where there isn t one and towards exaggerating it where there is. this is a graph used in the ippc s first and second assessment reports. it shows what scientists refer to as the medieval warm period, during which temperatures were as high or higher than they are today.as now, if true, this cast doubt on the idea that humans caused global warm