Climate Gate – All the manipulations and lies revealed 239

“Later, Pearce obtained a copy of Hasnain’s original article and discovered it did not mention 2035 as a date the Himalayan glaciers would disappear, as he told Pearce on the phone. The article also said it applied only to a portion of the Himalayan glaciers.

There the story lay until 2005 when the World Wildlife Federation, a key player in the climate change movement, cited the New Scientist account in its own report. From there it was picked up and embellished as part of the 2007 IPCC by Professor Murari Lai, who oversaw the report’s section on glaciers.

Neither Hasnain’s original Indian magazine article, Pearce’s account of it in the New Scientist nor the WWF’s citation qualifies as peer-reviewed scientific research. Yet there is this unsubstantiated speculation in an official U.N. document being used to justify draconian restrictions on the world economy as well as a global redistribution of wealth, all in the name of saving the planet.”

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=518615

The IPCC’s Abominable Snowmen

Posted 01/20/2010 06:52 PM ET

Global Warming: The scientists who said that Himalayan glaciers will be gone by 2035 have admitted the claim has as much credibility as sightings of the mythical Yeti. It’s their fraudulent claims that are melting away.

We hesitate to call it Glacier-gate, but the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the U.N. body tasked with scaring us to death about global warming, has admitted that the claim in its 2007 report about the Himalayan glaciers disappearing was not based on any scientific study or research. It was instead based on one scientist’s speculation in a telephone interview with a reporter.

The IPCC claimed: ”Glaciers in the Himalayas are receding faster than in any other part of the world and, if the present rate continues, the likelihood of their disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high if the earth keeps warming at the current rate.”

As it turns out, the earth hasn’t been warming at all, at least not in the last decade, and reputable scientists have said it may continue to cool for decades to come. Even if it was warming, glaciologists insist, the sheer mass of Himalayan glaciers made such a prediction laughable.

Professor Julian Dowdeswell, director of the Scott Polar Research Institute at Cambridge University, notes: ”Even a small glacier, such as the Dokriani glacier, is up to 120 meters (394 feet) thick. A big one would be several hundred meters thick and tens of kilometers long.”

According to Dowdeswell, the average glacier is 300 meters thick, so to melt one even at the rate of five meters a year would take half a century. ”That is a lot faster than anything we are seeing now,” he says, ”so the idea of losing it all by 2035 is unrealistically high.”

The current maximum observed rate of glacier melt worldwide is two to three meters a year.

The IPCC claim has been traced to an article published in 1999 in an Indian magazine by Syed Hasnain, a little-known scientist then based at the Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi, India. Journalist Fred Pearce heard of the article and interviewed Hassan for a piece in the popular journal, the New Scientist.

Pearce is quoted in the London Times as saying: ”Hasnain told me then that he was bringing a report containing these numbers to Britain. The report had not been peer-reviewed or formerly published in a scientific journal and it had no formal status, so I reported his work on that basis.”

Later, Pearce obtained a copy of Hasnain’s original article and discovered it did not mention 2035 as a date the Himalayan glaciers would disappear, as he told Pearce on the phone. The article also said it applied only to a portion of the Himalayan glaciers.

There the story lay until 2005 when the World Wildlife Federation, a key player in the climate change movement, cited the New Scientist account in its own report. From there it was picked up and embellished as part of the 2007 IPCC by Professor Murari Lai, who oversaw the report’s section on glaciers.

Neither Hasnain’s original Indian magazine article, Pearce’s account of it in the New Scientist nor the WWF’s citation qualifies as peer-reviewed scientific research. Yet there is this unsubstantiated speculation in an official U.N. document being used to justify draconian restrictions on the world economy as well as a global redistribution of wealth, all in the name of saving the planet.

Lai now says: ”If Hasnain says officially he never asserted this, or that it is a wrong presumption, then I will recommend that the assertion about Himalayan glaciers be removed from future IPCC assessments.”

It should be removed regardless because it is based on the anecdotal suppositions of a single scientist.

Like the infamous ”hockey stick” graph purporting to show sudden and man-induced warming, and the Climate-gate e-mails showing the efforts by researchers associated with Britain’s Climate Research unit to ”hide the decline” in global temperatures, the Himalayan glacier claim, like the IPCC report itself, is science fiction and not science fact.

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6” rel=”tag”>miljö</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet” rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter” rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter</a>, Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/USA” rel=”tag”>USA</a>

Etiketter: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Kommentera

Fyll i dina uppgifter nedan eller klicka på en ikon för att logga in:

WordPress.com Logo

Du kommenterar med ditt WordPress.com-konto. Logga ut / Ändra )

Twitter-bild

Du kommenterar med ditt Twitter-konto. Logga ut / Ändra )

Facebook-foto

Du kommenterar med ditt Facebook-konto. Logga ut / Ändra )

Google+ photo

Du kommenterar med ditt Google+-konto. Logga ut / Ändra )

Ansluter till %s


%d bloggare gillar detta: