From the Chicago Tribune, August 3, 2008
PERSON OF INTEREST RAJENDRA PACHAURI
By Michael Hawthorne
Story link: Blunt answers about risks of global warming
Note: Photo changed to this one at 4:40PM PST 8/3/08 due to previous one inviting negative comments about Pachauri’s personal appearance. – Anthony
Rajendra Pachauri isn’t nearly as famous as Al Gore, who shared the Nobel Peace Prize with an international panel on climate change that Pachauri, an Indian scientist and economist, has led since 2002. But as chairman of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Pachauri has an urgent message for world leaders about the perils of global warming. He talked to the Tribune recently while he was in town to meet with Mayor Richard Daley and Chicago civic leaders. An edited transcript follows.
Excerpts:
Q: What do you think about the small but vocal group of doubters still out there
Pachauri Answer: There is, even today, a Flat Earth Society that meets every year to say the Earth is flat. The science about climate change is very clear. There really is no room for doubt at this point.
Q: What have you done personally to shrink your carbon footprint?
A: I’ve become a vegetarian. I try to minimize the use of cars. Where I’ve failed is my impact with regard to air travel. I tell people I was born a Hindu who believes in reincarnation. It will take me the next six lives to neutralize my carbon footprint. There’s no way I can do it in one lifetime
Apologies to J Pauchaury and all others here. As an older, balding male I have also been the at the receiving end of taunts. I take them in stride. I am sure that Pachaury sees himself as a very handsome man, even as I see myself. What the human mind is capable of in fooling itself!
Here is the evidence, as I have been suggesting in another thread, how easy is to make someone look so stupid with one comment he made. There are close to a billion Hindus in India, and their religious beliefs are no more or no less credible to a neutral person than our beliefs. His comment about reincarnation is immaterial on AGW. it is unfortunate to see these discussions sometimes being reduced to personalities than dealing with substance alone.
“Dr. Rajendra K. Pachauri, the chairman of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), compared Bjrn Lomborg, Danish statistician and author of The Skeptical Environmentalist, to Adolf Hitler in an interview with Jyllandsposten, a leading Danish newspaper (Apr. 21).”
From a google search.
The more and more I learn of this fellow, the less and less I like him.
“This is not the first time Pachauri has launched an ad hominem attack on his critics since becoming chairman of the IPCC. In December in Milan at the ninth Conference of the Parties to the U. N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, Pachauri sent out a press release attacking the motives and affiliations of Ian Castles, former chief statistician of the Australian government, and David Henderson, former chief economist of the OECD. Castles and Henderson have pointed out that the storylines used to produce IPCCs predictions of future warming are based on ludicrously improbable economic assumptions.”
From a google search. These are not very current, maybe four years old. However, it seems he is using his same tactics. This time WE are his targets.
Shame on you Rajendra, what would your mother think?
Perhaps next time you answer questions from a reporter you might insert just a sentence or two about science between the attacks…
It seems not a single person in the college of cardinals of the church of the most revered AGW has any idea what the Flat Earth Society actually is.
It is mostly a drinking club. Very tongue in the cheek so to speak. John Glenn is an honorary member.
Wonder who funds this particular cat?
I have been, from my own research, a plant for my last 6 lifetimes. I can therefore leave as large a carbon foot print as I like. In fact, I should make sure I balance out my former lives as a carbon sink.
C’mon, people. Remember the IPCC was mandated to find as many reasons for climate change caused by humans as they could (fabricate). There was never any serious attempt at a scientific investigation of facts stated or intended. And I still maintain referencing science in this context is all wrong anyway, as this warming nonsense is simply the output of (poorly constructed) computer models, or computer games as they are known to the younger generation. PlayStation® science?
As far as ad-Hominem attacks are concerned, can anyone tell me what makes Hansen a climate expert in the first place? He is an astronomer, and his job is supposed to be concerned with outer space. NASA has a terrestrial climate operation wholly separate from GISS. Seems like a good subject for an Inspector General investigation for misuse of funds.
I might mention at this point that federal agencies do get reorganized, and IMHO, NASA is long overdue. CAA stubbed their toe back in the 50s and was reorganized as FAA. NASA used to be NACA, and space exploration requirements arose just in time to provide a politically viable reason for that reorganization, which was initiated to answer some accusations of incompetence in aviation research. FAA is looking good for another comeuppance, and maybe AGW will be NASA’s Achilles heel this time.
In an increasing politically correct westernised society, I think it it dangerous to allow religion overtones into a clearly scientific matter. Climate Science is already extremely political, but adding in Religion with the backing of the PC Bragaide is downright stupid. Religion absolutley must not be the driving force (intentionally or not) in this matter. Proof is what counts.
Can’t think when I last enjoyed a comment section this much. Ya’ll are funny and the levity helps the daily slog through all the mind-numbing absurdity out there.
That was a substantial drop in Mauna Loa CO2 readings, at a time of rapidly increasing industrialization worldwide: click
He still looks like he needs a bath and a haircut. Sloppy is sloppy from any angle.
I find it interesting that most of the readers here don’t know that Pachauri got his job with the backing of President Bush, because Bush couldn’t stand the other guy (talk about attempted totalitarianism failing dismally).
To Jim Black at 11:23 am on 3 08 2008 who wrote: “If Monckton’s paper, recently submitted to APS debate forum (Physics and Society), and which is aligned with Aqua data, proves the IPCC over-stated CO2 effects on climate sensitivity, AGW just dives deeper into doo-doo.”
Mr. Black, you need to follow-up on his actions since the APS provided him the soapbox:
The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley (hereafter referred to as TVMOB), who inherited his title, has been challenging Al Gore, who won a Nobel prize, to a debate for years now.
In July, a newsletter for APS published one of TVMOB’s analyses, wherein he summarizes the data he would likely use in the debate versus Gore. Within a week, scientists all over the web gutted his article; Deltoid, realclimate, and Duae Quartunciae are a few sites with well written critiques.
Meanwhile [skeptical] sites lauded TVMOB and gushed wonderfully about how wonderful he was. But they ignored the fact that his analysis had been trashed. But most importantly, they said nothing about the Viscount’s aberrant behavior as evidenced from his own postings on SPPI site. Viscount Monckton was sent a private copy of a rebuttal by Arthur Smith as a courtesy, at the same time Smith submitted the rebuttal for publication. The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley then added additional text to the paper, then PUBLISHED it on the SPPI site, with his own rebuttal of the rebuttal. This was before the author could possibly respond to any comments from the organization where he submitted the paper, and was done entirely without the permission of the author!
Meanwhile the editor indicated that the paper they published by The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley was NOT peer reviewed. Normally this would involve three peers, often anonymous referees, reviewing the methods and calculations in the paper, for those not familiar with peer review. The paper had received editing and the scientist who suggested some editing changes said he didn’t conduct a peer review. The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley then accused both the editor who published his paper, and the scientist who suggested some edit changes (who actually tried to constructively help him get the paper published), of being LIARS.
These kind of public attacks and behavior by The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, is without precedent in the scientific world, as far as I know. Any reputable scientist knows that you can’t publish the work of your colleagues without their permission, especially private courtesy copies. This is essentially stealing the fruits of another person’s work. I would think that those on this site, who believe in free enterprise systems, can appreciate and condemn these actions.
And so it is, that one of the leading opponents, a man who many in the denier camp admire and quote repeatedly, instead demonstrated himself any real principles!
For more on TVMOB’s bizarre behavior:
http://rabett.blogspot.com/2008/07/biter-bit-arthur-smith-has-had-quite.html
How can I check to see if I have a carbon credit carryforward from my previous 6 lives?
Charles the moderator:
this man brought religeon into the subject of climate change, where it was highly inappropriate. it warrants comment.
His casual aproach to his role as an international figure that may be infered from this strange inclusion demonstrates a lack of both intellect and integrity. The IPCC clearly has a loose cannon right at the top of it’s organisation. One that is suppose to represent the “greatest” government scientists of the world. How embarrassing for any nation that has commissioned such aman. Correction, how embarrassing for any nation to be SEEN commissioning this sort of person.
Why you telling me? I don’t moderate the UN.
Up Next: on Lifetime :: Interview with
a VampireIPCC chairman Dr RajendraSad, when you had achieved the greatest natural form of enlightenment. Your first lives were:
Switchgrass
Water Lily
Coral
Zooplankton
Algae (apologies to Gore)
Raj, this was your sixth lifetime. You have been absolved of the carbon indulgences of your previous life-forms in your previous five lifetimes.
This was the pinnacle of being, the confluence of wisdom over your five lifetimes. And you have thrown it all away, have you learned nothing from all the carbon you have neutralized over the past centuries?
Most of the time at the sixth day (incarnation) the human form is wise enough to realize that they are part of the world around them – including the human population. When this is learned, true enlightenment has occurred and you can move on.
I would have thought it not possible for one who has had every opportunity to be erudite, but it may take you another five lives to achieve elemental wisdom. You will return as one of the ad homo sapiens that you so vehemently misunderstand, to learn about your place in (with) the cosmos. For you cannot be alive until you embrace what you are.
From another time and place, a la Chicago, I am reminded of an SNL skit with Michael Jordan and Stuart Smalley: Dr Rajendra Pachauri, say it with me now: “I am good enough, I am smart enough, and doggone it — people like me!” Good – well, I think we’ve made progress today ..”.
Whatever will carbon, will carbon …
How would you like to see this headline?
ALERT: THIS IS A FAKE NEWS RELEASE
Head of IPCC recalled By Indian Prime Minister,
Earlier this week R Pachauri was recalled as head of IPCC because of the embarrassment he has caused the government and people of India. Indian climate scientists say that his actions have already caused much distress to India’s poor. They also add that his careless actions to eliminate the useful trace gas CO2, may actually cause the deaths of millions. India has already made it clear that they stand on the side of the advancement of their people, not the advancement of the catastrophic notions of the IPCC and others.
“We are protecting our people and our sovereignty.”, said Manmohan Singh, India’s forward thinking prime minister.
Wow, this board is loaded with ad hominem attacks. Craig McPeck starts it off at 9:52 with a personal attack, and then by 10:52, steven mosher suggest Pachauri should kill himself. And it just keeps going on.
The extraordinary truth, is that President Bush tried to control the IPCC and wouldn’t accept Watson, and so selected Pachauri (former oil company connections) instead.
I mean really, isn’t this whole post about a personal attack agenda, not based on what the man thoughts or his academic arguments, but instead attacking his appearance, his religion, and his sense of humor? Good grief, you wonderful denier people, get a life!
Reply: Yes, we have suggested people tone it down and raise the bar somewhat, but it is one those threads more about outrage than debate so it is what it is. Mosh did apologize at least.~charles the moderator.
[yes, your presnip comments applied~charles the moderator]
Sorry, apart from their controllist intent, I just can’t seem to take many of these cultist Believers very seriously anymore. It’s getting pretty boring trying to demand that they actually start doing Science .
[But inquiring minds still want to know, just when do the members think the next Comet will get close enough to save them?]
“ It will take me the next six lives to neutralize my carbon footprint. There’s no way I can do it in one lifetime!”
So, I guess because he is Hindu, he gets a bye on this lifetime, because he will make it up in future lives. And those of us who are not Hindu, also get a pass, or not? Well, obviously not, because if we all get a pass then who is going to do anything about catostrophic global warming.
This to me is the ultimate in hypocrisy. Carbon reduction doesn’t really apply to the true believer elite. Only to the rest of us. Take Al Gore for example, he also gets a bye because he offsets his carbon footprint by buying credits (actually stocks) through “Generation Investment Management”, which is what everyone else should do. This way Al makes money on AGW the same way big oil makes money on carbon. But because he is a member of the enlightened elite, its not really like he is making money, because he must save the world from itself.
Paul K: For my own part I don’t engage in uncivil, ad-hominem attacks… except against those like Dr. Pachauri & Dr. Hansen, who want me in an eco-gulag along with anyone who can read a thermometer or interpret a chart.
More personal attacks… now Graham H. at 18:10 refers to him as a vampire, and J. Peden at 18:30 says he is Yassir Arafat.
Regarding the original article, if readers follow the link, they find the bulk of the article is on the subject of the IPCC, but only the last two Qs were excerpted by Anthony Watts… an edit, of an edited interview. Fantastic.
Not to mention, Mr. Watts inserts a picture into the text of the article, right under the real author’s name, Micheal Hawthorne, of the Chicago Tribune. The picture isn’t in the original article. Wow. Plagerism at work.
I think I see what this site is about. Anthony puts up sound-bites and sight-bites, then the readers all congratulate themselves on how smart they are, and complain about how foolish scientists look. Not to mention, the fact that if the scientist practices a religion that believes in reincarnation, instead of something reasonable… like a married woman, still a virgin, who somehow is chosen by God himself, and impregnated by angels, and who delivers the lamb of God, who we (I am a Roman Catholic) celebrate each Sunday by eating his body and drinking his blood;
that because his religious beliefs are so outlandish, we should dismiss him as a scientist.
Wow. Is this any way to treat GW Bush’s man on the IPCC? And my God, what a site this is.
Paul K,
I’m leaving your latest post embargoed for Anthony to be final arbiter on–as far that comment I edited out of J. Peden, it could not have been up for more than ten seconds. I have to approve before I can edit. ~charles the moderator.
Maybe this is a silly question. But it seems that whenever I discuss global warming with people i run into on a daily basis, the majority, about 70%, think it is a crock. Usually those that believe are younger college graduates. Does this square with the observations of others here?
Adapting to Climate Diversity,
Mike Bryant
Paul K:
What, exactly does The Lord Monckton, 3rd Vicount of Brenchley have to do with the head of the IPCC?The Lord Monckton is not as you describe. Whether he inherrited his title is immaterial. He has as much right to comment as you. Go to Icecap and read further. Watch Lord Monckton’s lecture and judge the man as you see him rather than relying on Gavin’s opinion. You simply express rank prejudice and inverse snobbery otherwise.
Did youread the IPCC report? Any of it? Have you looked at the data? any of it? Do you trust Gavin Schmitt simply because it suits you? Have you simply been dazzled by Gavin Schmit’s habbit of blocking any descenting argumenton the RC site? If you do not care to go to the IPCC report to see how it compares with the rhetoric you hear from Al Gore and his like, I would recommend a little lighter viewing: The IQ2 debate on utube is revealing. Gavin Schmitt’s dereliction in making any sort of scientific argument when given a golden opportunity was weird. He definately let the side down. This is because the strength of the pro-AGW crisis debate is in the politics, not the science or common logic..
Isn’t it lucky for you that this site allows your views to be aired? Did you ever wonder why that is? why the disparity in treatment of opposing views between RC and this site? Ca is similarly transparent.
Do you smell any kind of rat there? I cannot understand, but am fascinated by your zeal for agw and your faith inAl.