Skip to comments.UN climate panel regrets Himalaya glacier data in report (IPCC eats bucket of Himalayan 'Crow')
Posted on 01/20/2010 9:58:27 AM PST by NormsRevenge
GENEVA (AFP) The UN's climate scientists said on Wednesday that an estimate on the fate of Himalayan glaciers which featured in a benchmark report on global warming had been "poorly substantiated" and was a lapse in standards.
Charges that the reference was highly inaccurate or overblown have stoked pressure on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), already assailed in a separate affair involving hacked email exchanges.
The new row focuses on a paragraph in the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report in 2007, a 938-page triple-volume opus that warned climate change was on the march and spurred politicians around the world to vow action.
In the contested section, the report declared the probability of glaciers in the Himalayas "disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high."
The IPCC .. "refers to poorly substantiated rates of recession and date for the disappearance of Himalayan glaciers."
"In drafting the paragraph in question, the clear and well-established standards of evidence, required by the IPCC procedures, were not applied properly," the panel said.
It added: "The Chair, Vice Chair and Co Chairs of the IPCC regret the poor application of well-established IPCC procedures in this instance.
"This episode demonstrates that the quality of the assessment depends on absolute adherence to the IPCC standards, including thorough review of 'the quality and validity of each source before incorporating results from the source in an IPCC report'."
The statement noted that the reference was not repeated in an important "synthesis report" of the 2007 assessment, and stressed the IPCC's "strong commitment" to thorough, accurate review of scientific data.
The IPCC co-won the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize for its reputation of scientific rigour, caution and fact-checking. Under this process, data are peer reviewed by other scientists and are then meant to be double-checked by editors.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
This photograph taken from an airflight shows the Everest mountain range in the Himalayas, in 2008. The UN's panel of climate scientists said that it regretted that "poorly substantiated" estimates on the speed of disappearance of Himalayan glaciers were included in its last report. (AFP/File/Diptendu Dutta)
The head of the UN's top body on climate change Dr Rajendra Pachauri, seen here in 2008, said the panel would investigate claims its doomsday prediction for the disappearance of Himalayan glaciers might be mistaken. (AFP/File/Torsten Blackwood)
You mean getting an obscure scientists opinion while talking to him in a bar doesn't count as research?
(ok - so maybe they weren't in a bar)
To help correct the damage, which can never be completely undone, the IPCC should purchase prime-time blocks on every major media outlet in the world, and publicly state that not only are their claims about Himalayan glacier melt untrue, but also that they are withdrawing all of their prior reports pending investigation into the so-called "science" underpinning them. It's far past the time to give them a pass on their pseudo-science!
ONLY SORRY THEY GOT CAUGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Crow tastes like chicken. Really dry chicken
It won’t matter how much proof that CO2 does not cause global warming (change). Tax dollars continue to fund unbelievable research.
Check this out: Urban green spaces may contribute to global warming, UCI study finds
“Let’s see. We had a glacier here just a moment ago. Now, where did it go? Oh! Here it is. Oh! You nasty little glacier, You; hiding from the satellite.”
This is the kind of junk science you get when you put 3rd world people at the head of any organization. They have just figured out flush toilets and the UN makes one of them a guru of climate change, global warming, global cooling... ahhh whatever is it this year!
Swiss mountain guides who always do the same trails can get tired answering the same questions over and over. One time an English tourist was giving his guide an especially hard time with silly questions. They were walking through a mountain valley that was strewn with rocks, and the traveler asked, “How did these rocks get here?”
“Sir,” said the guide, “they were brought down by a glacier.”
The tourist peered up the mountain and said, “But I don’t see any glacier.”
“Oh, really?” said the guide. “I guess it has gone back for more rocks.”
Well, they admit that one paragraph of an enormous report was flawed. And they regret publishing data that could easily be proven to be bogus. But they stick to their basic lies. And they still want to be paid a trillion dollars in taxpayer cash.
Never had such a good laugh. Still are! I was suppose to start a nap. Can’t stop laughing.
I began late in life studying the Ice Age. We covered it in Ohio in the 4th grade.
Anyway, back in 2004, after a few months of study, my wife and I went to Mammoth Cave. We got on a tour bus and the Ranger gave the usual spill. He sat down in front of us. I asked very respectfully, “May I ask you a Question?” He nodded yes. I asked, “What impact did the last Ice Age have on Mammoth Cave?”
I thought I said something stupid and shutup and was going to have to reach for a defibiulator. He looked at me for a moment and said “That is the most intelligent question I’ve had in 19 years of service.” Then he said, “Everything!”.
I knew I was on to something. He explained how glacier runoff caused the Green River to cut and Mammoth Cave followed.
Thanks for the humor.
The real story behind the Glaciergate scandal ... Dr. Rajendra Pachauri has rapidly distanced himself from the IPCC’s baseless claim about vanishing glaciers. But the scientist who made the claim now works for Pachauri. I can report a further dramatic twist to what has inevitably been dubbed “Glaciergate” - the international row surrounding the revelation that the latest report on global warming by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) contained a wildly alarmist, unfounded claim about the melting of Himalayan glaciers. Last week, the IPCC, led by its increasingly controversial chairman, Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, was forced to issue an unprecedented admission: the statement in its 2007 report that Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035 had no scientific basis, and its inclusion in the report reflected a “poor application” of IPCC procedures. What has now come to light, however, is that the scientist from whom this claim originated, Dr. Syed Hasnain, has for the past two years been working as a senior employee of The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), the Delhi-based company of which Dr. Pachauri is director-general. Furthermore, the claim - now disowned by Dr. Pachauri as chairman of the IPCC - has helped TERI to win a substantial share of a $500,000 grant from one of America’s leading charities, along with a share in a three million euro research study funded by the EU. - UK Telegraph