More fabricated climate change data- this time it's the glaciers

[Buzz Killington]

Ya don't say. More flib flubbery by the "climate change" (or was it global warming) extremists.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia/2010/01/2010123125937664296.html

The head of a United Nations panel of climate scientists has said that a prediction in one of the Nobel-prize winning panel's reports that Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2035 was "a regrettable error".

Rajendra Pachauri, who chairs the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), on Saturday dismissed talk of his resignation over the claim, but promised to tighten research procedures.

"I am not resigning from my post. There has been an error but we will ensure greater consistency in every [future] report," he told reporters in New Delhi.

"I am not brushing anything under the carpet."

The prediction was included in a 2007 UN report on global warming, in which scientists said the probability of glaciers in the Himalayas melting "by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high".

Exaggerated claim

The IPCC now says it took the exaggerated prediction from a 2005 report by the WWF environmental group.

The error was compounded by the accidental inversion of the date - 2035 instead of 2350.

On top of that, the WWF based its report on a single comment made by Syed Hasnian, an Indian glaciologist, in a 1999 article that appeared in the New Scientist magazine.

http://www.economist.com/sciencetechnology/displayStory.cfm?story_id=15328534

THE idea that the Himalaya could lose its glaciers by 2035—glaciers which feed rivers across South and East Asia—is a dramatic and apocalyptic one. After the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said such an outcome was very likely in the assessment of the state of climate science that it made in 2007, onlookers (including this newspaper) repeated the claim with alarm. In fact, there is no reason to believe it to be true. This is good news (within limits) for Indian farmers—and bad news for the IPCC.

This poses two questions. One is why Dr Kaser, or some other glaciologist, did not see the chapter earlier on. Like Gaul’s three parts, the IPCC’s working groups, rooted in different disciplines, have different tribal structures; they do not communicate as well as they should. Dr Field says he is determined to try to do something about this in the process leading up to the next set of assessments in 2013.

The other question is why, when alerted by Dr Kaser, the IPCC did nothing. When open criticism began last year, it was airily dismissed by Rajendra Pachauri, who chairs the IPCC and runs an institute in India where Dr Hasnain now works on glaciology. If he had not heard the claims were wrong by that stage, he should have done. This mixture of sloppiness, lack of communication and high-handedness gives the IPCC’s critics a lot to work with.

 

[Buzz Killington]

more of just scare tactics than fabricating data really.

and the skeptics are the ones that are on the wrong side of things?

 

[OSUBlazerfan]

Coulda told you this long time ago.....bullshit lies to push politcal agendas

 

[yakbladder]

They made a couple of errors, easily admitted to them...but, no, it's a conspiracy.

Funny, I never hear anything out of your mouth about Bush-era "conspiracies"...

You keep believing it and maybe it will make it right. In your head.

 

[blazerboy30]

They made a couple of errors, easily admitted to them...but, no, it's a conspiracy.

Funny, I never hear anything out of your mouth about Bush-era "conspiracies"...

You keep believing it and maybe it will make it right. In your head.

We can do whatever we want cause Bush did bad things!!

 

[Paxil]

Didn't the great lakes get formed by glaciers advancing and receding multiple times over millions of years? No doubt the planet has cycles we haven't been around enough to notice.

 

[MARIS61]

Oddly enough, maybe not, they do not provide any evidence or data to suggest the accidental (not fabricated) claim of 2035 is innaccurate.

I guess we'll know in 25 years.

The 2 glaciers I've seen in person have both shrunken dramatically since my youth.

 

[MARIS61]

Didn't the great lakes get formed by glaciers advancing and receding multiple times over millions of years? No doubt the planet has cycles we haven't been around enough to notice.

Yes it does have cycles.

Species come and species go.

No need to be lemmings and speed up the cycle.

 

[yakbladder]

We can do whatever we want cause Bush did bad things!!

That's not what I said, but that's pretty typical of your posts.

 

[drexlersdad]

funny that global warming disbelievers say there is no scientific proof, yet they generally believe in god which can not be proven at all.

silly.

 

[TradeNurkicNow]

We can do whatever we want cause Bush did bad things!!

retort fail

 

[Denny Crane]

You mean "report fail."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1245636/Glacier-scientists-says-knew-data-verified.html

Glacier scientist: I knew data hadn't been verified

The scientist behind the bogus claim in a Nobel Prize-winning UN report that Himalayan glaciers will have melted by 2035 last night admitted it was included purely to put political pressure on world leaders.

Dr Murari Lal also said he was well aware the statement, in the 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), did not rest on peer-reviewed scientific research.

In an interview with The Mail on Sunday, Dr Lal, the co-ordinating lead author of the report’s chapter on Asia, said: ‘It related to several countries in this region and their water sources. We thought that if we can highlight it, it will impact policy-makers and politicians and encourage them to take some concrete action.

‘It had importance for the region, so we thought we should put it in.’

 

[Stevenson]

You're right!

The snow on Mt. Kilimanjaro is not almost gone and the poles are not melting. Who you gonna believe, some "scientists" or your own lying eyes?