 So thanks to the colleagues here. It was amazing to hear, to be able to listen into that little deafening discussion. And it's, I think, a unique opportunity to have the opportunity to listen to those stories. I think that doesn't happen enough. I don't know how many of you were actually in the negotiations the past week. Maybe you can actually show perhaps who you have been really negotiating. At least following negotiations closely that many. Yeah, so that's at least a slightly larger show patch. But there's many people, the re-printed people that arrived yesterday or even this morning to come and listen to this. Because actually this is what it's about. And I think it's telling that we've got 14,000 people in the negotiations that don't come to listen here. But it is also our task to build those bridges and to get the connections between these sorts of stories and the stories in the negotiations, the discussion in the negotiations. And it is partly knowing about the challenges, but partly also bringing the solutions that can be connected there. And also bringing the evidence forward on exactly how we need to understand these problems and also what sort of solutions we can bring forward. And I think one of the things that was so powerful about the 1960 report that Bruce already introduced and that we'll be hearing more about in a minute, is that it started making those connections. And I think in essence we're in a very, very special time frame where it's more clear than ever that time is running out. The level of ambition is not high enough for exactly what we heard. It's already happening today. That also generates a certain awareness that we now actually do need to find that ambition somewhere. And you heard already from Claire about the processes on the way, especially in the coming year, where we can frame that ambition. And we can do that if we manage to connect what we just heard to those noble processes. And that is our collective job. It's not good enough for us to be here for two days and talk to each other. That is really valuable and I cherish that opportunity and I think we will all go back having been inspired by each other and doing better things on the ground. We also need to lift that up to this global level. I want to make a special plea. We will be looking for the evidence that needs to be brought to these noble processes. Over the course of the coming year, there is a lady who's sitting in the middle there and I will be moderating the final handle. And we will be in a position to ask some of the questions also to some of the people sitting close to those noble processes. As Claire was saying, we'll have some from the Global Commission on Editation Secretary, for instance. We will be able to ask them, so this is our analysis of some of these problems. These are some of our solutions. How are you going to be taking those into that level of admission that needs to be generated in the coming year but of course also beyond? So keep that in mind in your discussions in the coming two days. I think we also have an opportunity to better use the existing interfaces we have. And I think I was mentioning the 1.5 report. We are now starting an AR6 cycle that will result in reports that will inform the updating of the Paris Agreement in 2023. And we have an IPCC that is looking at this question of how it's relevant to this global admission in a very different way. You've seen that in the 1.5 report. I think Bruce was caught up two, three years ago. We had no idea how this was going to happen but look at what we've got in front of us. And it is partly because we've got an IPCC that is actually key to talk about an analysis that matters to people actually facing admission on the ground. But also an evidence-based analysis of the solutions that we can bring together. And it is partly where I think we have this in the year also in the leadership of the IPCC for some of the evidence that maybe was still finding a way to know how to do this before. I think we now have that opportunity. We also have an obligation on us in a way to make some of our evidence and our knowledge available to those processes. And I think what we can do in the coming two days is to talk about some of those messages and some of the evidence that needs to be brought forward. We also have to do our homework bringing more of it into ideally the peer-reviewed scientific picture. But otherwise the piece were two mechanisms to bring more attention to. And we know that the wide spots in the scientific evidence are still the places where we are most vulnerable as we also just heard. So that is a charge I think for all of us. But again I'm more encouraged by the progress we're making there. At the same time the problem is growing faster than the progress we're making. So I think we still need to be very aware that we've got a lot more to do. Yet at the same time I'm super excited about the steps we are making and the IPCC has been a very important part of that. And I'm really honored to now introduce Deborah Roberts, the co-chair of IPCC Working Group 2 on impacts of vulnerability and adaptation. And I think she embodies the fact that we are now building these bridges. She was a negotiator for South Africa. She was the chief executive officer in the city of Durgan really confronting some of these challenges at the local level. But also for practical solutions that would work for people globally. So having people like her in those spaces is really unique. And it's amazing to have such fantastic spokespeople also for those bridges but also for that scientific evidence. We had the honor of having Deborah with us in Geneva recently at the Planet Science and Humanitarian Dialogue. Where the humanitarian community that is confronted by these rising risks but still not so aware of the science for instance in an IPCC report was being briefed about what the findings are and what it meant to them. One of the interesting things is that on the evening we had a public event also. Young people also from Geneva and surrounding coming to listen. And we were preparing a panel. And at some point someone from one of the missions that was involved also invited all the diplomats. I think we have a problem. We might have a whole male panel and in our world that's been no longer okay. And how we're going to fix this. We've got the Dutch ambassador, the Swiss ambassador and then we've got the Vice President, Vice President C. And then we've got just the IPCC scientists. I said yes so it was the problem. Well I mean we would have a whole male panel. And it was not in people's minds that we now actually have leadership. Of course it's pre-programmed in the IPCC where we have leadership from the south. But I think we have general balance in the IPCC working groups as well. And both Valérie from group one and group two were the most inspiring advocates that we could have for this agenda. It was interesting how it was in people's minds that you would not have that sort of leadership in the IPCC. It was also really interesting to see the discussions. There are also really value in that humanitarian community. It's not used to getting the science in a way that connects to the reality. So once again Debra, it's fantastic to have someone like you bridging the hard scientific evidence and the decision making across all those levels. And I'm really honored to now ask you to tell us a bit about I think both the contents of the IPCC report but also where we think we need to take that both in our work and in the ground. We also need to tell the world. Thanks Debra.