Can I add to that?
I was involved in chapter 10, which is the chapter that looks at what will happen in the future, at global climate projections. Not a single one of our statements was changed.
The only differences between the Summary for Policymakers as put forward by the scientists and the one that was finally approved is that there's a bit more addition. I think that tells you.
I don't know how many of you have actually passed the Summary for Policymakers to policy-makers, but it's clearly written by scientists. Most policy-makers view this as gobbledygook.
In terms of what was added, for example, we put forward a figure that had a probability distribution function in it, showing how the probability distribution function evolved with time through the 21st century. What came out of plenary in the recent assessment in Paris was that they wanted SPM-7 to be added. That's a stick chart that is easier to understand, so that figure was added to our chapter in order to expand upon the more complicated figure. We also had a table added from some of the results that were in our chapter, but there was no substantial change.
So there was no change at all in the text in terms of anything of any scientific merit. The scientists wouldn't allow it. They would be up in arms if this were to happen.