The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is getting a lot of heat these days on the claim that the Himalayan glaciers will be gone by 2035.
While the information used by the IPCC is supposed to be peer-reviewed and well vetted, it turns out that this gem is derived from a magazine article in New Science several years ago that was based on a single phone call to an Indian scientist.
An IBD Editorial says:
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.
This issue has been hitting a number of other media sites over the last week or so.
Read the rest of the IBD Editorial at Investors.com.
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
I had read that and am glad the truth came out. That doesn’t mean there is no global warming, as far as I can tell the odds are very good that it exists.
I love this phrase, “has as much credibility as sightings of the mythical Yeti,” and may have to use it in everyday speech for a while.
teeni´s last blog ..Shopping Carts Thieves
It always amazes me how unscientific scientists can be. They hold onto their belief systems even harder than the average person, it seems. This is just shameful. We rely on these people.
Dot´s last blog ..Comment on On Becoming a Mother Too Young by Momisodes
Jean – There’s even more stuff coming out. It’s starting to look like so much of the temperature data has been homogenized and otherwise adjusted and manipulated — even the raw data — that the entire surface temperature record may be unreliable. I got into studying this because the idea that warming could be blamed on CO2 just didn’t make sense. I’m simply appalled at the bad, possibly fraudulent, science.
teeni – I agree. That is funny.
Dot – I’m to the point that I don’t think it’s a matter of belief systems — it’s unethical manipulation of information for political, ecological or financial reasons.