CapelDodger
Penultimate Amazing
The rather gruelling process has always resulted in that cut-off problem.One criticism of the IPCC is that it is too conservative (despite Richard Tol's rants). AR4 specifically excluded studies showing higher run-offs from Greenland ice-cap because studies showing that missed the publication deadlines.
I think the IPCC reports have had their day. A more rapid process producing relevant reports on specific areas. This could be under the IPCC or some new construct.Personnally I'm now in favour of annual update reports on the science and implications. This should capture recent changes in understanding better and would give a more frequent nudge to the general public about the implications.
The IPCC was a typical bureaucratic-diplomatic response to a potential problem : set up a committee and hope the whole thing goes away while they produce a report. Not a good basis, frankly. Five reports is flogging a dead horse.
The basics have been established; what it needs now is frequent updating on specific issues.
!