"To great fanfare, on January 20 the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) approved and released the “Summary for Policymakers” of its Third Assessment Report.[1] The summary was widely reported in the media around the world as further proof of the dangers of global warming. The problem, however, is that (as with the Second Assessment Report in 1995) the summary bears little resemblance to the actual report, which has not yet been approved for final release. The report itself is replete with caveats that give little support for the catastrophic global-warming scenario touted by anti-energy activists (commonly known as environmentalists)."
http://www.cei.org/gencon/004,01973.cfm

Examples:
"A warmer climate would raise sea levels as ice caps recede and could force tens of millions of people to flee low lying areas like China's Pearl River Delta, Bangladesh and Egypt, the IPCC chairman told a news conference in Shanghai.

Klaus Toepfer, the head of the United Nations Environment Program which part sponsors the IPCC, said the report should ring alarm bells everywhere.

A draft summary for policy makers, issued on Monday, said the report projects the earth's average surface temperature will rise 1.4 to 5.8 degrees Celsius (2.5 to 10.4 degrees Fahrenheit) between 1990 and 2100, higher than its 1995 estimate of a one to 3.5 degree C rise (1.8 to 6.3 degrees F).
Sea levels were likely to rise between nine and 88 cm (3.54 and 34.64 inches) over the same period, it said."
http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/headlines01/0122-02.htm

Now sea levels have been rising and if they continue to rise at the rate they have been for centuries and longer. Then sea level in 100 years will rise 20 cm. So on low end they are actually projecting a decease in this rate, but they make it seem that something horrible will happen if sea level rise is less in the period 1990- 2100, then it was between the period 1890- 2000. OR since lowering the rate or keeping the rate around same as it has been for thousands of years should not "force tens of millions of people to flee low lying areas like China's Pearl River Delta, Bangladesh and Egypt", one could assume they "think" the higher estimate is more likely in we will see a more than 4 times the normal rate. But in the more 15 years since 1990, we have not seen 400% increase, nor 200%, nor 100%, nor 50%. Now we could have flooding in this areas but it could have to with land area lowering- the area can rise or fall much more in same period of time as UN is saying sea levels are rising- it can be a much more dynamic element then sea level rise.