Told ya so…IPCC to retract claim on Himalayan Glacier Melt – Pachauri's "arrogance" claim backfires

WUWT first reported on this issue on 11/11/2009 and again on 12/22/2009,with

Pachauri claims Indian scientific position “arrogant”

The Himalayas. The IPCC had warned that Himalayan glaciers were receding faster than in any other part of the world and could “disappear altogether by 2035 if not sooner”. Photograph: Wikimedia commons

The head of the IPCC Dr. Rajenda Pachauri had said: India was ‘arrogant’ to deny global warming link to melting glaciers.From the Guardian article:

Two years ago, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the UN agency which evaluates the risk from global warming, warned the glaciers were receding faster than in any other part of the world and could “disappear altogether by 2035 if not sooner”.

Today Ramesh denied any such risk existed: “There is no conclusive scientific evidence to link global warming with what is happening in the Himalayan glaciers.” The minister added although some glaciers are receding they were doing so at a rate that was not “historically alarming”.

However, Rajendra Pachauri, the chairman of the IPCC, told the Guardian: “We have a very clear idea of what is happening. I don’t know why the minister is supporting this unsubstantiated research. It is an extremely arrogant statement.”

We also reported on the finding of Texas state climatologist  John Nielsen-Gammon

Texas State Climatologist: “IPCC AR4 was flat out wrong” – relied on flawed WWF report

Now who looks arrogant?

Rajendra Pachauri, IPCC Chairman

It’s now taken almost a month for the Times to catch up to this issue, and now it has made MSM news. Highlights in excerpts below are mine.

The Times, January 17, 2010

World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown

Jonathan Leake and Chris Hastings

A WARNING that climate change will melt most of the Himalayan glaciers by 2035 is likely to be retracted after a series of scientific blunders by the United Nations body that issued it.

Two years ago the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued a benchmark report that was claimed to incorporate the latest and most detailed research into the impact of global warming. A central claim was the world’s glaciers were melting so fast that those in the Himalayas could vanish by 2035.

In the past few days the scientists behind the warning have admitted that it was based on a news story in the New Scientist, a popular science journal, published eight years before the IPCC’s 2007 report.

It has also emerged that the New Scientist report was itself based on a short telephone interview with Syed Hasnain, a little-known Indian scientist then based at Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi.

Hasnain has since admitted that the claim was “speculation” and was not supported by any formal research. If confirmed it would be one of the most serious failures yet seen in climate research. The IPCC was set up precisely to ensure that world leaders had the best possible scientific advice on climate change.

Professor Murari Lal, who oversaw the chapter on glaciers in the IPCC report, said he would recommend that the claim about glaciers be dropped: “If Hasnain says officially that he never asserted this, or that it is a wrong presumption, than I will recommend that the assertion about Himalayan glaciers be removed from future IPCC assessments.”

The IPCC’s reliance on Hasnain’s 1999 interview has been highlighted by Fred Pearce, the journalist who carried out the original interview for the New Scientist. Pearce said he rang Hasnain in India in 1999 after spotting his claims in an Indian magazine. Pearce said: “Hasnain told me then that he was bringing a report containing those numbers to Britain. The report had not been peer reviewed or formally published in a scientific journal and it had no formal status so I reported his work on that basis. Since then I have obtained a copy and it does not say what Hasnain said. In other words it does not mention 2035 as a date by which any Himalayan glaciers will melt. However, he did make clear that his comments related only to part of the Himalayan glaciers. not the whole massif.”

The New Scientist report was apparently forgotten until 2005 when WWF cited it in a report called An Overview of Glaciers, Glacier Retreat, and Subsequent Impacts in Nepal, India and China. The report credited Hasnain’s 1999 interview with the New Scientist. But it was a campaigning report rather than an academic paper so it was not subjected to any formal scientific review. Despite this it rapidly became a key source for the IPCC when Lal and his colleagues came to write the section on the Himalayas.

When finally published, the IPCC report did give its source as the WWF study but went further, suggesting the likelihood of the glaciers melting was “very high”. The IPCC defines this as having a probability of greater than 90%. The report read: “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.”

However, glaciologists find such figures inherently ludicrous, pointing out that most Himalayan glaciers are hundreds of feet thick and could not melt fast enough to vanish by 2035 unless there was a huge global temperature rise. The maximum rate of decline in thickness seen in glaciers at the moment is 2-3 feet a year and most are far lower.

Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC chairman, has previously dismissed criticism of the Himalayas claim as “voodoo science”. Last week the IPCC refused to comment so it has yet to explain how someone who admits to little expertise on glaciers was overseeing such a report. Perhaps its one consolation is that the blunder was spotted by climate scientists who quickly made it public.

Pearce said the IPCC’s reliance on the WWF was “immensely lazy” and the organisation need to explain itself or back up its prediction with another scientific source. Hasnain could not be reached for comment.

The revelation is the latest crack to appear in the scientific consensus over climate change. It follows the climate-gate scandal, where British scientists apparently tried to prevent other researchers from accessing key date. Last week another row broke out when the Met Office criticised suggestions that sea levels were likely to rise 1.9m by 2100, suggesting much lower increases were likely.

Read the full article here: World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown


Sponsored IT training links:

We offer complete collection of 642-902 dumps including 642-813 study guide to help you pass N10-004 exam on first try.


Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Jason F

And the first card fell.

Ron DeWitt

What is “WWF”? World Wildlife Federation? That would be an odd source.

rbateman

Personally, my take is that India had something to say about this, and it might have something to do with ‘foreign bodies’ with designs on throttling India’s newfound productivity.
Voodoo Science? Mighty harsh words from the High Shaman of GAIA.
Where is the love?

Sean

This is good news. Now if we could get the US Government to stop relying on WWF and the Sierra Club to set US energy policy we might make a little progress.

Its not just the little cracks in the glaciers that are appearing.
Its the chasms in the IPCC that are more substantial.

PaulH

Perhaps its one consolation is that the blunder was spotted by climate scientists who quickly made it public.
From:
http://theresilientearth.com/?q=content/crumbling-pillars-climate-change
A number of scientists who backed the CO2 based AGW theory are now suffering from buyer’s remorse. According to atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh, “many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly, without having their professional careers ruined.”
What’s the sound of backing out quietly? ;->
Paul

Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of people…
because nicer people are not rooting about, looking for a sellable excuse to enslave the world.

al

Read this today – the funniest bit:
“Professor Murari Lal, who oversaw the chapter on glaciers in the IPCC report…”
then,
“Lal himself admits he knows little about glaciers. “I am not an expert on glaciers.and I have not visited the region so I have to rely on credible published research. “

Glenn

“Professor Murari Lal, who oversaw the chapter on glaciers in the IPCC report, said he would recommend that the claim about glaciers be dropped”
Here’s the IPCC report, linked from the Times article:
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch10s10-6-2.html
“WWF 2005”, “Hasnain, 2002” ??
I’d recommend Professor Lal be relieved of his duties and return to writing scripts for newspaper cartoons.

John F. Hultquist

Does anyone want to bet against the possibility that the WWF and similar alarmists camps will be ‘unavailable for comment” over the next couple of weeks?
And I thought it was decided not to show Pachauri’s photo on a site that had young and impressionable viewers!

LeoR

The institute that Pauchauri receives enumeration from, has a share in a lucrative €3 million EU research project called “High Noon”, aimed at assessing the effects of the Himalayan glaciers retreat, caused by climate change.
Now if that isn’t incentive to find and espouse any data, regardless of the source, to support shrinking glaciers, I don’t know what is. It is a huge conflict of interest, which interestingly enough does not contravene any Conflict Of Interest Guidelines for IPCC committee members, because there are no Conflict Of Interest Guidelines for the IPCC committee members. How convenient.

Glenn

Apparently Hasnain is an experienced and well known glaciologist:
http://www.zoominfo.com/people/Hasnain_Syed_518063942.aspx

P Walker

” Who looks arrogant ? ” Sorry folks , that’s not arrogant , that’s flat out ugly .

Yes, an absurd claim, but it is TRUE. Right here in the IPCC report.
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch10s10-6-2.html
It is incredible that the IPCC quotes a WWF report, but they do, doesn’t that stand for World Wresting Federation?

Sharon

And how many more frozen skeletons will emerge from the “Cabinet of Dr. Pauchauri”?? (Bonus points for anyone who knows that reference!) About as many as lie atop the Himalayas? Or lots, lots more?

Jeff C.

The IPCC should have relied on the other WWF – the World Wrestling Federation. They have more credibility.

Anticlimactic

The same article is reported in these three papers :
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6991177.ece
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/Himalayan-melting-by-2035-Scientists-just-assumed-so/articleshow/5459848.cms
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/united-nations-blunder-on-glaciers-exposed/story-e6frg6n6-1225820614171
All three articles seem to have the same base story, and I think all three titles are owned by Murdoch. Is the stance of the Murdoch empire turning against AGW?

MichaelC58

Never mind ‘arrogance’ or “I told you so’. Rajendra Pachauri must be forced to resign and the IPCC revamped, if not dissolved.
When the Chairman of such influential body as the IPCC oversees a gravely misleading mistake in AR4, then fails to investigate it when pointed out, instead attacking the source of the new information, and has known conflicts of interest to boot, he has clearly failed any test of competence and integrity and must be forced to resign.
If a police chief or even a government minister showed such contempt for due process, he would be removed. That Pachauri remains in his position, indicates the low level of honesty, competence and heights of hypocrisy deemed acceptable at the UN. Pachauri must resign.

jaypan

Glenn, thank you. Here it goes:
“The Hindukush-Himalayan-Tibetan glaciers are the water towers of Asia,” says Prof. Syed Iqbal Hasnain of the Energy Research Institute, who has been studying the melting of the Himalayan glaciers for several years.
Looking ahead, the prospects seem to be getting worse rather than better, according to Hasnain. “Scientists have projected a 43 percent decrease in the glacial area on an average by 2070 and a 75 percent decrease in the glacial area by the end of the 21st century at the current rate of global warming,” says Hasnain.
At the current rate of global warming … beside there is a huge gap between “disappeared by 2035” and “43 percent decrease by 2070”, this simple forward-calculating of something happening today for another 100 years is the worst possible way of forecasting.
If I continue drinking as I did last night, I will not survive the next 20 years … something at this level.
Interesting to learn how the IPCC works and what many politicians swallow easily.
Not funny.

GGM

And considering his arrogant, un-scientific statements and actions on this issue – Why hasn’t he been sacked ? His behaviour was totally unacceptable for a scientist, and there is no excuse for him not being sacked for his behaviour.

Anticlimactic

LeoR (16:46:29) :
“The institute that Pauchauri receives enumeration from, has a share in a lucrative €3 million EU research project called “High Noon”, aimed at assessing the effects of the Himalayan glaciers retreat, caused by climate change.”
What has the money been spent on so far – obviously not research.
The EU could be asking for it’s money back!

Glenn

nofreewind (16:53:35) :
“It is incredible that the IPCC quotes a WWF report, but they do, doesn’t that stand for World Wresting Federation?”
World Wildlife Fund.
http://www.worldwildlife.org/who/media/press/2005/item4512.html
Here’s the report
http://assets.panda.org/downloads/himalayaglaciersreport2005.pdf.
“As discussed in the thematic introduction to this regional status review, there is particular concern at the alarming rate of retreat of Himalayan glaciers. In 1999, a report by the Working Group on Himalayan Glaciology (WGHG) of the International Commission for Snow and Ice (ICSI) stated: “glaciers in the Himalayas are receding faster than in any other part of the world and, if the present rate continues, the livelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 is very high”

bubbanewbie

nofreewind (16:53:35) :
It is incredible that the IPCC quotes a WWF report, but they do, doesn’t that stand for World Wresting Federation?
WWF lost the court case with WWF!
It is now World Wrestling Entertainment. It must be this type of clout the IPCC is looking for.

Patrick Davis

I really wish more stories like this are covered by the MSM in Australia before the Federal Govn’t tries to ram it’s ETS through the Senate in February.
So many people have been had, hook, line and sinker, by the perpeTRAITORS of AGW/ACC.

Sordnay

OT remove if you find it not apropiated
I would like your opinion about this mail http://assassinationscience.com/climategate/1/FOIA/mail/0880476729.txt
(note: on eastangliaemails this email only contains Tom’s answer, i find it also interesting the document they endorsed (might be the begining of the climate politics epoch?), and btw why it’s not full on eastangliaemails?)

Andrew S

The story from The Times was reprinted in The Australian newspaper and made front page.

Mick

Arny in PREDATOR: Y o u u g l y ……
I know, sorry couldn’t resist!
Please put the mask back!

pat

anthony,
the nasa giss/kusi story continues to be totally ignored by the MSM. and i mean TOTALLY, apart from delingpole’s blog.
HOWEVER, have u seen this?
NYT: Andrew Revkin: Hansen and Watts Agree: Cold Weather, Warm Climate
Some critics said this was simply Mr. Watts’s trying to cover for his earlier posts on unusual cold and to appear moderate amid all the strident charges that global warming is an outright hoax.
But to my mind, given the depth of the gulf between the perception of climate held by many people and the scientific realities, this is a moment of accord worth noting. …
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/17/hansen-and-watts-agree-cold-weather-isnt-climate/
u may want to read the FEW comments as well.

Lazarus Long

Voodoo Science, Voodoo Economics, the collectivists are always wrong.

MattN

Yeah, the WWF would never make anything up, right…?

No one will resign or be fired or punished in any way. They will probably get more money for their positions or research just the same as Mike Mann. Governments are mostly corrupt and lots of the folks that work for them.
I have a great attitude-don’t I?

u.k.(us)

accepting a nobel prize is not the same as earning one.

Ron de Haan

It’s a first step but it would be better if the IPCC would retract their entire AGW claims
so we can stop the entire package of Government policies that will kill or economies, from CO2 emission standards for vehicles to the use of bio fuels, wind and solar.
We have 300 years to develop real technologies to replace fossil and abiotic fuels.
Preferably in a free market by free people without any Government meddling.

latitude

““If Hasnain says officially that he never asserted this”
Since when is some great scientific announcement made,
based on just one person’s say so?
“Syed Hasnain, a little-known Indian scientist”
and a little known one at that
“the blunder was spotted by climate scientists who quickly made it public”
Horse poop

Not Amused

This is just too much fun watching the flies getting caught and squirming in their spider web of lies…
More more more !!

Another Ian

WWF – doesn’t that stand for “Waiting for the Wheels to Fall off”?

Of course, Prof. Syed Iqbal Hasnain now works for TERI in India.
Probably doesn’t get to pocket a “penny” either, although if we looked at Rupees or US Dollars……..

Anticlimactic

http://www.eu-highnoon.org/nl/25222860-Research_project.html
The principal aim of the project is:
“to assess the impact of Himalayan glaciers retreat and possible changes of the Indian summer monsoon on the spatial and temporal distribution of water resources in Northern India and to provide recommendations for appropriate and efficient response strategies that strengthen the cause for adaptation to hydrological extreme events.”
Critical comment on Pechauri’s involvement :
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2009/12/high-noon-for-pachauri.html

It’s time to return the Nobel Prize and face some jail time, you crooks. What a mafia organization the IPCC turned out to be.

Glenn

From Dec 2009
“Murari Lal, a climate expert who was one of the leading authors of the 2007 IPCC report, denied it had its facts wrong about melting Himalayan glaciers.
But he admitted the report relied on non-peer reviewed – or ‘unpublished’ – documents when assessing the status of the glaciers.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8387737.stm

sisyphus

…and this is just the tip of the iceberg.

“Told ya so…IPCC to retract claim on Himalayan Glacier Melt – Pachauri’s “arrogance” claim backfires”
The closest I see to a retraction is from Lal: “If Hasnain says officially that he never asserted this, or that it is a wrong presumption, than I will recommend that the assertion about Himalayan glaciers be removed from future IPCC assessments.”
I wouldn’t call that a retraction. Even removing the assertion is no where near a retraction, it’s just sweeping something under the rug and hoping no one really notices.

Wondering Aloud

“If Hasnain says officially that he never asserted this, or that it is a wrong presumption, than I will recommend that the assertion about Himalayan glaciers be removed from future IPCC assessments.”
What if he doesn’t do this what if he says (as he did) that he did indeed say this? What in blazes does that have to do with it? Isn’t the qusestion “does proper research support the assertion? ” If not shouldn’t the statement and conclusions be retracted and have NOTHING to do with what he said. In fact shouldn’t a rediculous claim like this have been checked before it ever got into any report?

KDK

The UN is totally corrupt and has NO problems in lying, manipulating data and using ‘drs’ and ‘scientists’ that actually PROFIT from their campaigns… swine flu, cap trade, food for oil, etc.
The UN deserves NO slack and should be slain at every opportunity. The UN is just a front, so let’s dismantle it.

Neil Crafter

A very large front page article on this in The Australian today, very good to see.
So the climate scientists that read the IPCC 2007 report that contained this claim ‘quickly made it public’ about 2 and a half years later!! Hate to see how long it would have taken them if they were tardy……

Down goes the Himalayan Glacier “pillar”. This is OT and a few years old, but shouldn’t be missed, proves They did the same shenanigans with hurricane as has now been exposed with Himalayan Glaciers.
Chris Landsea former NOAA and now National Hurricane Center hurricane expert and contributing IPCC author, resigning from IPCC.
http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/archives/science_policy_general/000318chris_landsea_leaves.html
Note: The first comments is from William Connolley.
Most interesting is the resignation follow-up email correspondence between Landsea and IPCC notables(aka The Liars Club), including Trenberth and Pauchari. Even includes all the email addy’s for those of you who are looking for pen pals.
Landsea is a Man of Great Character in my book, although I know there are many who resigned rather than go with the gravy train of consensus.
http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/archives/ipcc-correspondence.pdf

J.Peden

According to atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh
That J.Peden is not me.
The WWF are among the morons who thought Polar Bears can’t swim very well and implied that Polar Bears automatically begin fasting if their paws touch dry land.

jaypan

There’s a poor guy, Orville Schell, here at
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/07/opinion/main6069933.shtml
who took the Himalayan glaciers as an opener to compare with America’s meltdown. Sad story. Unfortunately published 2 weeks ago. LOL
Maybe he will reconsider the state of this nation now as well.
Must read the introduction. Made my day tonight.

Patrick Davis (17:15:57) :
I really wish more stories like this are covered by the MSM in Australia before the Federal Govn’t tries to ram it’s ETS through the Senate in February.

Exactly. The Australian newspaper ran it as their lead page 1 story this morning:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/united-nations-blunder-on-glaciers-exposed/story-e6frg6n6-1225820614171
That’s about 2% of Australia’s population who are informed (i.e the weekday readership of The Australian newspaper).
Let’s see how much coverage is given to the story later today by Australia’s mainstream electronic media, which usually broadcasts entertainment masquerading as journalism. Put a celebrity on a glacier and the story might get coverage.
The Australian Broadcasting Corporation may run the story because they have enough adequately trained journalists to overcome their pro-AGW bias.
If the ABC does broadcast, combined with the readership of The Australian, that’ll mean about 20% of the Australian population is properly informed.
Watch the commercial TV news tonight to see if the story has any penetration with the voters, and thus any influence on the politicians.

Sordnay (17:18:11) :

I would like your opinion about this mail http://assassinationscience.com/climategate/1/FOIA/mail/0880476729.txt
(note: on eastangliaemails this email only contains Tom’s answer, i find it also interesting the document they endorsed (might be the begining of the climate politics epoch?), and btw why it’s not full on eastangliaemails?)

Files like http://eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=40&filename=880476729.txt have a serious bug – the program that created the web site stopped copying the file when it reached a character that isn’t in the 95 printable character ASCII set. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ascii
assassinationscience.com doesn’t do much better, it replaces them with a funky question mark, at least that what I see. In my file (from the Russian .ZIP file), I have “Jill Jäger” which should print as “Jill Jäger”. There are several international characters in that file, it’s a bit unfortunate that people can’t read the files as they were intended to be seen.