UPDATE: links to new information posted at the bottom of this article, including a new story from the Times
UPDATE2: Jonathan Leake’s story at the Time is Online, linking Pauchari’s TERI organization to government funding grants that were solicited using the bogus “Himalayan glaciers will disappear by 2035” claim.
Christopher Booker of the Telegraph has a story that shows Pachauri’s own employee at TERI was the source of the bogus glacier claim. Now the corruption comes full circle.
UPDATE3: Pachauri now bizarrely claims in a press interview that the IPCC’s credibility has been strengthened.
IMHO, Dr. Pachauri is toast. He has nowhere to go except out.
See links at end of this story
We’ve covered some of the travails of IPCC Chairman Dr. Rajenda Pachauri here at WUWT in the past couple of weeks. Besides the facts mentioned above, the National Hurricane Center chief scientist Christopher Landsea resigned in 2007 from the IPCC over what he cited as lack of confidence in the science.
I personally cannot in good faith continue to contribute to a process that I view as both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound.
Most notable recently was the bogus claim In the IPCC AR4 that Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035 that appeared to be based on nothing more than a journalist’s opinion piece, contrary to IPCC rules that reports be based on peer reviewed science. The Times of India has just run their first political cartoon on the subject.
That in itself was a bombshell, since the IPCC had to withdraw the claim. Other errors in the report have been found also and it is looking like the IPCC didn’t do any checking of this section of their report, bringing the entire report into question.
There’s also been quite a bit of first class investigative work done by Christopher Booker of the Telegraph and Dr. Richard North of the EU Referendum about Dr. Pachauri’s connections to TERI (The Energy Research Institute) and his IPCC position. As I pointed out about his email usage, it seems he has a difficult time delineating the two to ensure that there is no conflict of interest.
Now it appears that conflict of interest charges are about to go to a higher level.
The “IPCC 2035 glacier error” has been used to solicit funds for new projects, and guess where the money goes?
This PDF File is from the EU’s HighNoon website, and shows how the EU set up a project to research the ‘rapid retreat’ of glaciers in the Himalayas based on the bogus IPCC report. Some of the EU taxpayers’ money put into this project has gone to TERI, which is run by Dr. Rajendra Pachauri.
See slide number 5 for the IPCC citation.
It appears that is using this single “…disappearing by the year 2035” statement as justification for an entire research project, funded by the EU, which is funded by taxpayers.
As we see in slide 7, they got a nice tidy 10 million Euros ($14.13 millon USD) to study a false statement based on nothing more than a passing opinion.
I have word through a backchannel that Jonathan Leake of the London Times is about to make known financial linkages to this and several more TERI/IPCC projects funded by taxpayer dollars.
Here’s his Times report from last week.
I’ll make his newest report available here as soon as it appears.
UN wrongly linked global warming to natural disasters
Jonathan Leake, Science and Environment Editor
BREAKING NEWS:
Leake: UN climate panel blunders again over Himalayan glaciers
Taxpayers funding research under Pachauri’s TERI organization
Booker: Pachauri: the real story behind the Glaciergate scandal :
Dr Pachauri has rapidly distanced himself from the IPCC’s baseless claim about vanishing glaciers. But the scientist who made the claim now works for Pachauri, writes Christopher Booker
Bizarre claim: ‘IPCC’s credibility has increased’: Pachauri
“Facing a barrage of questions from the media about his `loss of credibility’, Pachauri maintained that all “rational people” would continue to repose their faith in IPCC and its findings.” – yeah right.
Sponsored IT training links:
Take advantage of latest 70-662 questions and answers written by our 646-364 certified team to help you pass 70-291 exam in first try.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The UN should have hired Bernie Madoff to head up the IPCC – they would then have got a more honest approach to climate science…
Junican (21:09:53) :
If our politicians took less notice of health scares and corrupt advice, we would all be much better off. Unfortunately, the need to increase tax revenue seems to be paramount.
—————–
brc (21:45:18) :
If NZ can make it’s neighbouring countries have higher energy costs, while not drastically increasing their own, then it’s a net win for them.
—————–
At least in the US, finding additional sources of federal government income indeed is paramount. There is no way at this point that the US can reduce spending enough to live off the current $tream and tax $cheme. We’ve sold radio spectrum, drilling rights, logging rights… and the rest of our assets are collateral on loans from China. The interest, social security and health care alone will eat the whole pie in a few years.
Combine that with the current desire to redistribute wealth from banking and oil industries to citizens and illegal “residents” alike, and it is pretty clear why climate control looks like such a great opportunity to fulfill both objectives. It’s the money. It’s always been about the money. (Tobacco is about the money, too.) Climate control is an industry with incredible potential for generating tax revenue plus an entire asset structure (cap and TRADE) on top of equity markets we have now. It’s ripe for speculation and making a fast (and very large) buck after the oil $tream dries up. Everyone, not just the likes of Gore and Soros, is looking at it for “what’s in it for me.” NASA doesn’t have a mission after the shuttle retires. Climate is their only real future. Who needs NOAA charts when there is Google Earth? Selling off desert and ocean rights for windmills is new revenue.
US, EU and UK need the UN to validate the need for all this. So, it’s not the UN leading stupid politicians into the trap for a few thousand research dollars. The research dollars are a bribe from the governments to ensure the UN committee gives the answers they need to implement the policy. Which rather begs the question why they basically fired the UN in Copenhagen for a “gaggle of governments” solution. Did they already know just how bad the report was? Anyway, as long as we are speculating about motive and conspiracies, I thought I would throw this in the mix.
What happened with NOAA data is another -gate begging for investigation. Except I think that one could actually be criminal. But that’s another story.
Watch, if this story goes nuclear, politicians will be running for the microphones to explain how they were duped by these reliable scientific and international sources, just like they were about WMD. I think that’s why it doesn’t get as much news coverage. Too many news people and politicians are going to look stupid again. Can’t blame Bush for this one. Here, it is a bad time between now and 2013 to look like fools.
Obviously, this is an opinion and there isn’t any science to back this up. I am just offering some different speculation on motive.
How do these people sleep at night?
On a pillow filled with twenties.
Running an ordinary auto on the starter battery is unsustainable. We need to outlaw starter batteries.
Gate is an over used suffix, imho.
Yes. and -ed has to go as well.
John Good (17:21:14) :
The ill fated Catlin Arctic Survey rears its’ ignominious head again in an article in todays UK Daily Telegraph. Quote ‘Pen Hadow admits battery was the problem on Arctic Climate Change’.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/7053637/Pen-Hadow-admits-battery-was-the-problem-on-Arctic-climate-change-expedition.html
What would it take to fire Pachauri? It is obvious that he needs to be removed from his “elected” position for lapse in judgment, as he will not go quietly into the night. He still seems to believe that he has the support of the world to put out his bogus assessment report.
The credibility of the MSM is more important to those who own it than defending the indefensible CAGW scam.
The ability of politicians to continue to rule us is more us is more important to them than defending the indefensible CAGW scam.
What we have been seeing since Climategate broke are the first signs of a sea change in how both groups are going to wriggle off the hook of culpability and throw the IPCC and many climate scientists to the wolves.
The next few months should be very interesting!
the article best describes the future effect of temperature on earth. if this temperature continues then the end of world begins
M. Simon (02:11:31) :
Running an ordinary auto on the starter battery is unsustainable. We need to outlaw starter batteries.
Running autos on starter batteries is perfectly sustainable. You just have to alternate.
M. Simon (02:23:32) :
Gate is an over used suffix, imho.
Yes. and -ed has to go as well.
-ism! Don’t Forget -ISM!
That’s a very overused suffix. Man, ain’t that a truthism.
Who appointed Pachauri? Who ensured the governance process of IPCC. Who was / is accountable for ensuring segregation of interests and duties? Pachauri is clearly at fault but the buck must stop higher than him whether in the UN or governments. Who are the names? What are their interests?
We need a spider chart and a pack of playing cards.
A more subtle and insidious way to plant that dart is to refer to them as “organized climesters” or “members of organized clime.”
Lal had better hope there’s no e-mail trail of Kaser’s communication on a server somewhere, or that Kaser doesn’t have other support for his letter being received by other authors, such as insider testimony. It’s very unlikely that Kaser would lie — he has no motivation, being a fervent warmist and an IPCC bigshot. Lal OTOH has strong motivation to deny, since to admit would be a The End of his career.
This denial of Lal’s, if it can be proven to be false, would have a more devastating impact on CAWGism than Climategate, because it will tar the IPCC at the highest level. It’ll be like what happened when Nixon’s fallback statements on Watergate unraveled. The public will start to suspect thoroughgoing untrustworthiness and call for a new broom .
The Woodward & Bernsteins in the media ought to press for a copy of Kaser’s letter or e-mail, and dig around to see if any IPCC insiders were aware of Kaser’s criticism at the time.
Hi
After reading the article, I was shocked the way people have made hue and cry for the 2035 error. Eventhough, I admit that the stated year for the complete melting of the glaciers, 2035, was wrong, but this can not take away the credibility of the millions of scientists of all nationalities working for a cause that would benefit the mankind as a whole. I feel, it was immature of an organisation like IPCC to rely on the secondary data (as they took this 2035 from another reputed magazine) but at the same time the fact that global warming indeed has caused incorrigible damage to the environment cannot be written off. As for the money is concerned, which is huge and hard-earned of several people, the IPCC should definitely account for its usage, but at the same time when big conferences and elections can waste so much of taxpayer’s money, this was still unintenional and served some purpose. I have myself worked with TERI before a couple of times and am very much convinced of their research. I think, we shouldnt get emotional about things that we are normally not concerned about and just get involved to add fuel to the fire. As for the man, Dr. R.K Pachauri, by my own experiences with him I can only say that I have found him to be one of the most approachable guys of all those with that big worldwide recognition.
I would think the real problem would come if the Himalayan glaciers STOPPED melting. If that were to happen, where would those millions of people get their water?
Geoff Alder
Harry (15:22:46) :
No free wind
“This glacier melt thing is nonsense regarding drinking water. We have no glaciers in the eastern US and only a small amount even in the West.”
Living in Western Washington State…if our Glaciers were to disappear a big chunk of our drinking water would as well.
Out here we depend on Snow melt.
The Columbia River is mostly snow melt as well, we depend on that for electricity.
No Glaciers = ”No Snow to melt in the summer”.
Well the snow would instead fall as rain in winter, you then dam the river to store the water until the summer to cover the dry season and produce some electricity. But the Glaciers not melting so why worry,
“Mayank Mathur (05:42:19) :
[…]
I have myself worked with TERI before a couple of times and am very much convinced of their research. ”
Ah great, somebody who knows them. Mr. Mathur, i am concerned as a European taxpayer that the 10 Mill. Euro we gave to TERI for further research into this terrible problem with the glaciers might go to waste, now that the media are all finding it hard to believe that there is a problem. Do you think that TERI will be able to deliver a more robust fabrication for our 10 Million Euros in the future or is the money lost? I mean it would be terrible if the EU HIGHNOON project comes back empty-handed, they must at least have some kind of believable scare scenario for their money.
Here is the original IPCC AR4 report about the retreat of Hymalayan glaciers:
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch10s10-6-2.html
The table shows how many m/year the glaciers retreat, one of them for instance 23 m/year!!! That means if its gone by 2035 this glacier must have had a total length of, wait, about 644 m in 2007.
Now that’s what i call a cute little glacier. Mr. Mathur, are you really sure that the people of TERI don’t sleep under their desk the entire working week?
Mayank Mathur (05:42:19) :
Oh my, the best defence you can put up, is to damn the poor man, ( Pachauri ), with faint praise.
While at the same time admitting to taking his Shilling, with friends like you who needs enemies?
The glacier i was talking about is the Gangotri glacier.
Gangotri Glacier
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Goumukh, terminus of the Gangotri glacier (lower right in image, behind prayer flag). The Bhagirathi peaks rise in the background.
GoumukhGangotri Glacier is located in Uttarkashi District, Uttarakhand, India in a region bordering China. This glacier, source of the Ganga, is one of the largest in the Himalayas with an estimated volume of over 27 cubic kilometers.[1] The glacier is about 30 kilometres long (19 miles) and 2 to 4 km (1 to 2 mi) wide.
The original and arch environmentalist columnist Geoffrey Lean of the Telegraph has just come out and called for Pachouri’s head in his latest blog on the subject, the third in three days. Is he at last actually reading the reactionary comments that he gets every time he produces an article, or is he more concerned at his own position in maintaining his overtly warmist and denialist position at the Telegraph?
It has been a good week in the UK for newspaper revelations starting with the Times disclosure, followed by a front page headline with supporting editorial in the hard copy version of the Daily Express, numerous articles in the Telegraph and Sunday Telegraph electronic and paper versions, but the most devastating one following the original Times report must be The Mail’s article reporting Murari Lal’s admission that he knew the claim was false even before it went to press. That must be the most devastating confirmation of all that the IPCC is telling complete and utter lies in order to further it’s own agenda..
Sorry I forgot to leave a link to Geoffrey Lean’s Telegraph report.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/geoffreylean/100023489/pachauri-must-quit-as-head-of-official-science-panel/
I think the melting from 500.000 to 100.000 in case of not taking action did not refer to square but to dollars of grant.
Now the Telegraph has published a new story blowing apart the IPCC ‘science’.
Here it is:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/globalwarming/7066720/UN-climate-science-panel-incorrectly-linked-global-warming-to-rise-in-natural-disasters.html