IPCC Admits EVEN MORE Errors
Posted by Casey on January 22, 2010
The arrogance of these greenies is almost unbearable. Yesterday I told you that the IPCC was forced to admit they’d lied about some of their claims, and lifted them from magazine articles that weren’t based on any science or research … but hypothesis.
Today it’s more of the same. Along with a defiant refusal to step down by the IPCC’s fearless
fraud leader, Dr Rajendra Pachauri. Who as it turns out, has NO climate science credentials at all. He’s the literal equivalent of Joe the Plummer dictating climate policy.
The IPCC’s 2007 report, which won it the Nobel Peace Prize, said that the probability of Himalayan glaciers “disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high”.
But it emerged last week that the forecast was based not on a consensus among climate change experts, but on a media interview with a single Indian glaciologist in 1999.
The IPCC admitted on Thursday that the prediction was “poorly substantiated” in the latest of a series of blows to the panel’s credibility.
Gee, another Nobel Prize awarded based on fraud … shocking.
Syed Hasnain, the Indian glaciologist erroneously quoted as making the 2035 prediction, said that responsibility had to lie with them. “It is the lead authors — blame goes to them,” he told The Times. “There are many mistakes in it. It is a very poorly made report.”
He and other leading glaciologists pointed out at least five glaring errors
in the relevant section.
It says the total area of Himalyan glaciers “will likely shrink from the present 500,000 to 100,000 square kilometers by the year 2035”. There are only 33,000 square kilometers of glaciers in the Himalayas.
There’s more errors highlighted in the article, including the IPCC using the World Wildlife Fund (the people who scare your children with dead animals) as a source of information. The IPCC is not supposed to use advocacy groups for data. That last part should be a no brainer, but I guess the lines get blurred when you’ve ceased to be a scientific entity and instead become an advocacy group yourself.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.