That would be Bad Science.
Hey folks,
So according to Sphere - UN Climate Chief Won't Resign Over Glacier Warning.
LONDON (Jan. 23) -- It sounds like the plot of a Hollywood disaster movie: Central and Southern Asia are hit by biblical floods when the Himalayan glaciers suddenly melt. After that cataclysm, water no longer flows from the mountains, leaving rivers like the Mekong and Ganges dry and millions facing permanent drought. That was the picture painted by the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's 2007 report, which said there was a "very high" chance that these glaciers would disappear by 2035 if the world kept warming.
Like Al Gore's movie that incorporated scenes from the disaster movie Day after Tomorrow? But the other problem is, we are not warming any more.
But the IPCC, the U.N. body charged with investigating climate change, retracted that claim after it emerged that its predictions of a sudden melt weren't based on peer-reviewed evidence, but instead on an article that appeared in the popular science magazine New Scientist in 1999.
While the Khumbu Glacier near Mount Everest is shrinking, the United Nations admits it overstated the threat of a total glacial meltdown in the Himalayas.
On Saturday, IPCC Chairman Rajendra Pachauri dismissed calls for his resignation over the error and said no action would be taken against the report's authors, The Associated Press reported. He expressed regret that the doomsday prediction was included in the report but said the mistakes should not obscure the fact that glaciers are melting at an alarming rate.
{Laughing} Forget the fact it's just been proven to be fraudulent. Forget the fact that this is completely made up BS. Just believe it!
Climate change skeptics have lapped up the scandal, which they dubbed "Glaciergate," saying that it further erodes the credibility of climate science already damaged by last year's Climategate e-mail scandal. Global warming denier Peter Foster, writing in Canada's National Post, said the error showed how the "IPCC's task has always been not objectively to examine science but to make the case for man-made climate change by any means available."
Well, we know where the writer of this piece stands. "Global warming denier Peter Foster?" GW Denier? How about Sane, Commonsense and Logical observer of Reality? No point in denying something that is nothing more than a SCAM to begin with.
But Jean-Pascal van Ypersele, vice chairman of the IPCC, said the mistake did not undermine the report's key conclusions: that the warming climate is accelerating glacial melt and that this will affect the supply of water from the world's major mountain ranges, "where more than one-sixth of the world population currently lives."
"I don't see how one mistake in a 3,000-page report can damage the credibility of the overall report," van Ypersele told the BBC. "Some people will attempt to use it to damage the credibility of the IPCC; but if we can uncover it and explain it and change it, it should strengthen the IPCC's credibility, showing that we are ready to learn from our mistakes."
Complete and utter BS folks. This whole thing is a SCAM. The IPCC are SCAM ARTISTS.
The argument over the IPCC's melt date went public last November, when a paper written by Indian geologist Vijay Kumar Raina revealed that there was little consistency in the behavior of the Himalayan glaciers. Some were shrinking, he found, some expanding, and others were stable. If global warming were to blame, he asked, why weren't they all following the same pattern? "A glacier ... does not necessarily respond to the immediate climatic changes," he wrote. "For if it be so then all glaciers within the same climatic zone should have been advancing or retreating at the same time."
India's environment minister, Jairam Ramesh, endorsed the paper and accused the IPCC of being "alarmist" in its predictions. But Pachauri shot back that Raina's findings were "voodoo science" and accused Ramesh of repeating the claims of "climate change deniers."
GW is SCARYENCE. Scare Science. Completely bogus and made up BAD SCIENCE. There is no REAL SCIENCE involved at all.
Embarrassingly, it's now the IPCC that stands accused of sloppy science, as a rigorous system of fact checks would have kept the controversial assertion out of the 2007 report. The claim first appeared in a 1999 interview between a New Scientist journalist and the Indian glaciologist Syed Hasnain, who speculated that the mountain range's glaciers could vanish by 2035.
Every ten years or so we are told we only have ten years left. When is that?
Environmental group the World Wildlife Fund then repeated Hasnain's prediction in its 2005 report, "An Overview of Glaciers, Glacier Retreat, and Subsequent Impacts in Nepal, India and China." As this was only was a campaigning paper, it had not undergone a thorough scientific review. But its lack of scientific rigor didn't stop the IPCC using the WWF document as a source.
In chapter 10 of its 2007 report, the IPCC concluded: "Glaciers in the Himalaya are receding faster than in any other part of the world, and if the present rate continues, the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high if the Earth keeps warming at the current rate. Its total area will likely shrink from the present 500,000 to 100,000 square kilometers by the year 2035 (WWF, 2005)."
WE HAVEN'T WARMED SINCE 1998!
But many glaciologists believed those claims were overheated. As most Himalayan glaciers are hundreds of feet thick, only a sudden, huge spike in global temperatures could cause them to disappear before 2035. "The reality, that the glaciers are wasting away, is bad enough," Graham Cogley, a glaciologist at Canada's University of Trent, who played a key role in exposing the flawed claim, told the United Kingdom's Sunday Times. "But they are not wasting away at the rate suggested by this speculative remark and the IPCC report. The problem is that nobody who studied this material bothered chasing the trail back to the original point when the claim first arose."
Indian glaciologist Murari Lal, the lead author of that section of the IPCC report, last week rejected claims that the U.N. group had made a serious error. "We relied rather heavily on gray [not peer-reviewed] literature, including the WWF report," Lal told New Scientist. "The error, if any, lies with Dr Hasnain's assertion and not with the IPCC authors."
Unsurprisingly, Hasnain has refuted that attempt to pass the blame. "The magic number of 2035 has not [been] mentioned in any research papers written by me, as no peer-reviewed journal will accept speculative figures," he said to New Scientist. "It is not proper for IPCC to include references from popular magazines or newspapers."
That's a tough but obvious lesson, and one the IPCC is unlikely to forget.
But they will forge on as long as they think that America has a Naive or Willing Congress and or President. Forget none of it is true. Question is, what will the Leadership of America do about it?
Peter
Sources:
Sphere - UN Climate Chief Won't Resign Over Glacier Warning
Hey folks,
So according to Sphere - UN Climate Chief Won't Resign Over Glacier Warning.
LONDON (Jan. 23) -- It sounds like the plot of a Hollywood disaster movie: Central and Southern Asia are hit by biblical floods when the Himalayan glaciers suddenly melt. After that cataclysm, water no longer flows from the mountains, leaving rivers like the Mekong and Ganges dry and millions facing permanent drought. That was the picture painted by the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's 2007 report, which said there was a "very high" chance that these glaciers would disappear by 2035 if the world kept warming.Like Al Gore's movie that incorporated scenes from the disaster movie Day after Tomorrow? But the other problem is, we are not warming any more.
But the IPCC, the U.N. body charged with investigating climate change, retracted that claim after it emerged that its predictions of a sudden melt weren't based on peer-reviewed evidence, but instead on an article that appeared in the popular science magazine New Scientist in 1999.
While the Khumbu Glacier near Mount Everest is shrinking, the United Nations admits it overstated the threat of a total glacial meltdown in the Himalayas.
On Saturday, IPCC Chairman Rajendra Pachauri dismissed calls for his resignation over the error and said no action would be taken against the report's authors, The Associated Press reported. He expressed regret that the doomsday prediction was included in the report but said the mistakes should not obscure the fact that glaciers are melting at an alarming rate.{Laughing} Forget the fact it's just been proven to be fraudulent. Forget the fact that this is completely made up BS. Just believe it!
Climate change skeptics have lapped up the scandal, which they dubbed "Glaciergate," saying that it further erodes the credibility of climate science already damaged by last year's Climategate e-mail scandal. Global warming denier Peter Foster, writing in Canada's National Post, said the error showed how the "IPCC's task has always been not objectively to examine science but to make the case for man-made climate change by any means available."
Well, we know where the writer of this piece stands. "Global warming denier Peter Foster?" GW Denier? How about Sane, Commonsense and Logical observer of Reality? No point in denying something that is nothing more than a SCAM to begin with.
But Jean-Pascal van Ypersele, vice chairman of the IPCC, said the mistake did not undermine the report's key conclusions: that the warming climate is accelerating glacial melt and that this will affect the supply of water from the world's major mountain ranges, "where more than one-sixth of the world population currently lives."
"I don't see how one mistake in a 3,000-page report can damage the credibility of the overall report," van Ypersele told the BBC. "Some people will attempt to use it to damage the credibility of the IPCC; but if we can uncover it and explain it and change it, it should strengthen the IPCC's credibility, showing that we are ready to learn from our mistakes."
Complete and utter BS folks. This whole thing is a SCAM. The IPCC are SCAM ARTISTS.
The argument over the IPCC's melt date went public last November, when a paper written by Indian geologist Vijay Kumar Raina revealed that there was little consistency in the behavior of the Himalayan glaciers. Some were shrinking, he found, some expanding, and others were stable. If global warming were to blame, he asked, why weren't they all following the same pattern? "A glacier ... does not necessarily respond to the immediate climatic changes," he wrote. "For if it be so then all glaciers within the same climatic zone should have been advancing or retreating at the same time."
India's environment minister, Jairam Ramesh, endorsed the paper and accused the IPCC of being "alarmist" in its predictions. But Pachauri shot back that Raina's findings were "voodoo science" and accused Ramesh of repeating the claims of "climate change deniers."
GW is SCARYENCE. Scare Science. Completely bogus and made up BAD SCIENCE. There is no REAL SCIENCE involved at all.
Embarrassingly, it's now the IPCC that stands accused of sloppy science, as a rigorous system of fact checks would have kept the controversial assertion out of the 2007 report. The claim first appeared in a 1999 interview between a New Scientist journalist and the Indian glaciologist Syed Hasnain, who speculated that the mountain range's glaciers could vanish by 2035.
Every ten years or so we are told we only have ten years left. When is that?
Environmental group the World Wildlife Fund then repeated Hasnain's prediction in its 2005 report, "An Overview of Glaciers, Glacier Retreat, and Subsequent Impacts in Nepal, India and China." As this was only was a campaigning paper, it had not undergone a thorough scientific review. But its lack of scientific rigor didn't stop the IPCC using the WWF document as a source.
In chapter 10 of its 2007 report, the IPCC concluded: "Glaciers in the Himalaya are receding faster than in any other part of the world, and if the present rate continues, the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high if the Earth keeps warming at the current rate. Its total area will likely shrink from the present 500,000 to 100,000 square kilometers by the year 2035 (WWF, 2005)."
WE HAVEN'T WARMED SINCE 1998!
But many glaciologists believed those claims were overheated. As most Himalayan glaciers are hundreds of feet thick, only a sudden, huge spike in global temperatures could cause them to disappear before 2035. "The reality, that the glaciers are wasting away, is bad enough," Graham Cogley, a glaciologist at Canada's University of Trent, who played a key role in exposing the flawed claim, told the United Kingdom's Sunday Times. "But they are not wasting away at the rate suggested by this speculative remark and the IPCC report. The problem is that nobody who studied this material bothered chasing the trail back to the original point when the claim first arose."
Indian glaciologist Murari Lal, the lead author of that section of the IPCC report, last week rejected claims that the U.N. group had made a serious error. "We relied rather heavily on gray [not peer-reviewed] literature, including the WWF report," Lal told New Scientist. "The error, if any, lies with Dr Hasnain's assertion and not with the IPCC authors."
Unsurprisingly, Hasnain has refuted that attempt to pass the blame. "The magic number of 2035 has not [been] mentioned in any research papers written by me, as no peer-reviewed journal will accept speculative figures," he said to New Scientist. "It is not proper for IPCC to include references from popular magazines or newspapers."
That's a tough but obvious lesson, and one the IPCC is unlikely to forget.
But they will forge on as long as they think that America has a Naive or Willing Congress and or President. Forget none of it is true. Question is, what will the Leadership of America do about it?
Peter
Sources:
Sphere - UN Climate Chief Won't Resign Over Glacier Warning
3 comments:
Living in Montana and watching the glaciers in the park disappear in just the 22 years I've been here is a bit disconcerting. Something is obviously excelerating the process.
I know it's an el nino year but it was in the 50's all week. In Montana, in January. Every winter we break the record highs we broke last year. No snow in the mountains. Fires all summer. Something is happening. If you run your car in bubble for 10 hours, it's gonna get pretty darn hot in there. I know that's a simplistic approach, but I can see right before my eyes what's happening in those mountains and it ain't good. Natural ice ages and melts happen over hundreds (at a minimum) of years. Not dozens. I don't care much what all those scientists say, come live where I do. Not natural.
Hey Peter,
Truth is, we are having record cold and Snow fall nation wide. Truth is, some areas are warmer than others, then some are colder than others. Greenland was once covered in Ice, yet some areas that are frozen now, show signs that they were once warm, with all kinds of life. It's all just natural.
Peter
All I know is when you introduce the fresh waters of, say, glaciers into warm salt waters the result is a change in climate. It's my understanding that the ocean streams are mostly responsible for climate and when they are altered, the climate is altered. There is no denying the earth's climate has changed innumerable times throughout it's 4.5 billion years. There is also more than enough evidence to suggest climate change that resulted in very rapidly developing mini ice ages that started with a warming trend and melting of ice, influencing the ocean streams. However, these extreme rapid changes (a decade or less) were a direct result of a major event such as an asteroid hit or volcanic activity.
With the excellerated melting of ice sheets and glaciers the globe over and no natural catastrophic event evident, what could the reason be for such a rapid melt-off of this ice that is affecting the streams which is affecting the climate?
Could it be humans?
The term "global warming" is useless. And climate change happens. But this quickening of change must be addressed for it WILL affect the world economy not to mention the lives of tens of millions of humans.
Post a Comment