The London Times is reporting:
“The chairman of the leading climate change watchdog was informed that claims about melting Himalayan glaciers were false before the Copenhagen summit, The Times has learnt.
Rajendra Pachauri was told that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assessment that the glaciers would disappear by 2035 was wrong, but he waited two months to correct it. He failed to act despite learning that the claim had been refuted by several leading glaciologists.”
See the Times article here
And from Richard North at The EU Referendum, this video news report link and his commentary:
Less than a week after he claimed the IPCC’s credibility had increased as a result of its handling of the “Glaciergate” scandal, Pachauri’s own personal credibility lies in tatters as The Times accuses him of a direct lie.
This is about when he first became aware of the false claim over the melting glaciers, Pachauri’s version on 22 January being that he had only known about it “for a few days” – i.e., after it had appeared in The Sunday Times.
However, Ben Webster writes that a prominent science journalist, Pallava Bagla – who works for the Science journal (and NDTV as its science correspondent) – claims that last November he had informed Pachauri that Graham Cogley, a professor at Ontario Trent University and a leading glaciologist, had dismissed the 2035 date as being wrong by at least 300 years. Pachauri had replied: “I don’t have anything to add on glaciers.”
Bagla interviewed Dr Pachauri again this week and asked him why he had decided to overlook the error before the Copenhagen summit. In the taped interview, he asked: “I pointed it out [the error] to you in several e-mails, several discussions, yet you decided to overlook it. Was that so that you did not want to destabilise what was happening in Copenhagen?”
Dr Pachauri replied: “Not at all, not at all. As it happens, we were all terribly preoccupied with a lot of events. We were working round the clock with several things that had to be done in Copenhagen. It was only when the story broke, I think in December, we decided to, well, early this month — as a matter of fact, I can give you the exact dates — early in January that we decided to go into it and we moved very fast.”
According to Pachauri, “… within three or four days, we were able to come up with a clear and a very honest and objective assessment of what had happened. So I think this presumption on your part or on the part of any others is totally wrong. We are certainly never — and I can say this categorically — ever going to do anything other than what is truthful and what upholds the veracity of science.”
Without even Bagla’s input, we know this to be lies. Apart from anything else, there was the crisis meeting under the aegis of UNEP – which we reported on Thursday – which concluded that the 2035 claim “does not appear to be based upon any scientific studies and therefore has no foundation”.
Read his complete essay here
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
From Richard North’s site I noticed this dated 29th Jan so I await the full report with interest
Mpaul@634,
of course what the guy is saying is absolutely correct, no one scientist or group can keep peer reviewed papers out of the IPCC. However what the moron has side stepped is the very fact that individual scientists and groups HAVE conspired to keep papers that go against Mann made global warming ™ from being peer reviewed in scientific publications and to keep those papers from being published, which in effect means they can be ignored by the IPCC.
Unless of course that paper is from the wwf et al.
Regards
Mailman
I made a funny spoof trailer starring Pachauri as the Wolfman of Copenhagen, must watch and rate! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5psmpWYWBlM Enjoy!
“The chairman of the leading climate change watchdog was informed that claims about melting Himalayan glaciers were false before the Copenhagen summit…”
I suspect that Pachauri knew long before Dec 09.
OT, but here in Australia, the media are on an all-out scare campaign. Stranded walruses a scare website is http://www.100places.com and it appears to be in German, ice meting, the same old adverst on TV with black carbon balLOONs escaping up into the sky etc.
And in February, the Govn’t tries to sell an ETS to the Senate.
Icing on the cake tonight; Doom gloom movie “The Core”.
Good one, zombiehellmonkey. I gave it 5 stars.
Talk about condemned out of his own mouth-
from pat(18:49:17)
Quote from Pachauri
“If the IPCC wasn’t there, why would anyone be worried about climate change?”
Indeed, why would they?
When did Pachauri Know?
We know he knew in Dec ‘09, but he first said he knew in January ‘10.
However when he knew we knew he knew in Dec ’09, he said he did know but he was too busy. I reckon he knew before we knew he knew but he knows that we don’t know that for sure!
zombiehellmonkey (02:46:46) :
Yup – it’s got to be 5 stars.
Andrew30, wow stunning find; the BBC and a great deal of local authority pensions depend on AGW that explains everything!
Sooner this comes crumbling down the better, if I was told my pension was fragged because of this I might break out the pitchfork and go for the people who instigated this dodgy investment plan.
Would Dr Phillip Bratby contact me? (email via Anthony please).
Louis Hissink
Editor,
AIG NEWS
@David Ball (19:06:11) :
“SlightlyO/T~~ I see that skepticalscience blog has misrepresented skeptics by an order of magnitude. Alarming. It is set up a lot like WUWT? Do you think that might have been intentional? Do you also think the title of the blog is design to catch people who want to learn more about the subject before they get to WUWT? I have been blocked from posting at every alarmist site I have found. Dare I try skepticalscience?”
Sure, give it a try, but keep it academic and polite. A little circularity may help your post get past the moderators. At the very least you’ll create some extra work for their censors. skepticalscience is run by an Aussie. Usually those guys tend to be rather cool headed, but realize that right now Australia is in the midst of their summer heat. I’m not surprised that you’ve been blocked at numerous alarmist sites, since blocking dissenting views is the hallmark of propagandist sites that have an agenda, have an aversion to debate and don’t give a **** about the truth.
Andrew30 (18:07:17) :
“…within three or four days, we were able to come up with a clear and a very honest and objective assessment of what had happened”
Hmm… I heard no mention of Halcrow Consulting anywhere in the ‘honest and objective assessment of what had happened’.,,”
Roger Knights (00:59:47) :
“…Dr. Lal is next up. He’s more important, because he’s been involved longer (20 years) and more deeply with the IPCC’s internals than Pachauri. (The heads of organizations and foundations are often chosen to interface with the outside world rather than manage the entity itself.)
I hope the Daily Mail has got Lal on tape, and that Kaser can and will produce a copy of the letter he sent Lal, and that it includes Lal’s address. If so, then he’ll be “pinned and added to our collection,” as Sherlock Holmes once said.”
Your both right I think, Dr, Lal will be sure to get the chop as well. I was amazed to hear his confession of guilt in the Daily Mail article – it beggars belief! Excerpt and URL to full article below:-
Glacier scientist: I knew data hadn’t been verified
By David Rose
Last updated at 12:54 AM on 24th January 2010
“…The scientist behind the bogus claim in a Nobel Prize-winning UN report that Himalayan glaciers will have melted by 2035 last night admitted it was included purely to put political pressure on world leaders.
Dr Murari Lal also said he was well aware the statement, in the 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), did not rest on peer-reviewed scientific research.
In an interview with The Mail on Sunday, Dr Lal, the co-ordinating lead author of the report’s chapter on Asia, said: ‘It related to several countries in this region and their water sources. We thought that if we can highlight it, it will impact policy-makers and politicians and encourage them to take some concrete action…”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1245636/Glacier-scientists-says-knew-data-verified.html
I keep thinking about the old myth about how foxes rid themselves of fleas by grabbing some wool in their mouth and backing in to water until all the fleas are on the wool, and they let go of the wool.
If you think of the IPCC as the fox, Pechauri as the wool and the fleas as inconvenient truths and criticism….
The pseudo-science is settled, the only remaining problem is reality.
Geoff Sherrington (02:35:08) :
From: “Isaak M. Khalatnikov” to Keith Briffa
In view of what has happened, perhaps that should have been “Kalashnikov”.
“within three or four days, we were able to come up with a clear and a very honest and objective assessment of what had happened”
And after less than a week the science was settled again.
Pechauri ? not Pinochio?
If he were it seems as if his nose would be at least 6metres long.
David Ball (22:43:16) :
My post of (22:17:47) was directed to davidmhoffer (21:01:36) . Thanks
Saw it Dave, but have since dropped the thread. Blowing through cowtown on weekend, will wave as I go by.
They are all complicit in the IPCC lies, that’s how these things always turn out.
Patchy Pachauri tells lies
Whose size justifies our surprise
When he slips in a trice
On the Glaciergate ice
No-one denies his demise
[snip if you want!]
As it happens, we were all terribly preoccupied with a lot of events. We were working round the clock
———————————————————–
We were studying the effect of the Royal We and got distracted. It was horrid, you should have been there, we would have waved.
http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/story.html?id=2501876
The Nationalpost is not quite mainstream, but they are one of only two national papers in Canada. That said, the writer is full time with the CBC (Canada’s version of the BBC for you Brits). The CBC hasn’t been alarmist per se in mu opinion, but they have certainly been warmist. One of their own speaking out is sgnificant.
Unfortunately, the “real culprits” of AGW are not the Pachauri’s and Lal’s, the Phil Jones’ or the Michael Mann’s, or the millions and millions duped into demonstrating and chanting for, and donating to, “the cause”. The worst among us are the business men and politicians who used “science” and fear and sought to seperate us from our meager savings and basic freedoms for their own perverse gain. Presidents, Vice Presidents, and Prime Ministers, Senators and Representatives, MP’s, Banking and Industrial Tycoons, Publishers and Political Party bosses, these privilaged few are the true scum of the Earth. Who will hold them to account? John and Mary Voter won’t!
Quote: Luboš Motl (23:49:24) :
“I think that this dead man will be walking for a lot of extra time.
The surprise that he knew it for two months is ludicrous. This chap has surely known that he’s been lying about all important things at least since 2002 and probably much longer than that.”
I fear that you may be right. He learned from the very best. In the face of precise, space-age measurements, the Geophysics Section of NAS and NASA have lied very successfully about Earth’s heat source – the Sun.
His foolishness was in thinking that people could be equally as easy deceived about the weather!
With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Emeritus Professor of
Nuclear & Space Sciences
Former NASA PI for Apollo
“A disgusting putrid apology of an outrageous perversion of the scientific method. I would urge all readers to review the comments as their very sharp audience weighs in and cuts the apologists to shreds. I have included one that will make all Cornell alumni very proud:
“Shame on SA for publishing such a blatantly biased apology for what appear to have been long lasting and willful manipulations on an issue of the greatest importance to us all. Casual dismissal of Climategate as “a record of how Science is actually done” is deeply offensive to me. No this is not the way Science is actually done! Climategate has brought to public light all kinds of behaviors anathema to Science: Groupthink, restricted and/or proprietary access to data, significant use of poorly documented yet “highly complex” data processing techniques, primary reliance on extrapolations or “proxies”, and most damningly, offhand dismissal of skeptics as crackpots, quickly come to my mind. As a scientifically trained person, I am genuinely embarrassed that the Wall Street Journal, as opposed to SA, has understood the great concerns raised by Climategate.
Dr Thierry Copie Ph.D Physics 1988, Cornell U.”
…-
“Negating “Climategate”: “…” Climate Science Survive Stolen E-Mail Controversy (Read Comments)
Scientific American ^ | Jan 29, 2010 | David Biello
Copenhagen—Even under this city’s low, leaden skies, at least one thing remained clear as leaders from 193 countries gathered to negotiate climate agreements: one ton of carbon dioxide emitted in the U.S. has the same effect as one ton emitted in India or anywhere else. That simple truism is part of a huge body of data pointing to humanity’s effect on climate, and for most negotiators, the weight of that evidence seems to have crushed any doubt they may have felt in the wake of the 1,000-plus e-mails and computer code stolen from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU).
The theft made headlines as “Climategate” in November, and many private correspondences among scientists became public. Climate contrarians and politicians, including Senator James M. Inhofe of Oklahoma, have claimed that the messages show that climate science was far from settled, that “tricks” were used and that researchers hid unfavorable data.
In fact, nothing in the stolen material undermines the scientific consensus that climate change is happening and that humans are to blame. “Heat-trapping properties can be verified by any undergraduate in any lab,” notes climate scientist Katharine Hayhoe of Texas Tech University. “The detection of climate change, and its attribution to human causes, rests on numerous lines of evidence.” They include melting ice sheets, retreating glaciers, rising sea levels and earlier onset of spring, not to mention higher average global temperatures.
(Excerpt) Read more at scientificamerican.com …”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2440733/posts