UK Greenpeace director calls for new IPCC chairman – meanwhile Pachy comments on the use of makeup

In an interview with the Times, John Sauven, director of Greenpeace UK suggests that the IPCC needs a new chairman other than The Love Guru. But, in a recent press release, it looks like the IPCC is digging in their collective Nobel Laureate heels. Meanwhile, news of newspaper clippings in IPCC AR4 peer reviewed research.

Current IPCC chairmanin R.K Pachauri and his smutty romance novel

With quotes like these coming from Pachy, he’s quickly running out of supporters who have been looking past his blown credibility. Here’s a quote from the Love Guru himself in a Financial Times interview today:

They are people who say that asbestos is as good as talcum powder – and I hope they put it on their faces every day…

(h/t to Andrew Bolt for that one) Send in the clowns! Maybe he’s referring to the makeover suggested by the National Post?

John Sauven, director of Greenpeace UK , said that Dr Pachauri should have acted as soon as he had been informed of the error, even though issuing a correction would have embarrassed the IPCC on the eve of the Copenhagen climate summit.

The IPCC needed a new chairman who would hold public confidence by introducing more rigorous procedures, Mr Sauven said. “The IPCC needs to regain credibility. Is that going to happen with Pachauri [as chairman]? I don’t think so. We need someone held in high regard who has extremely good judgment and is seen by the global public as someone on their side.

“If we get a new person in with an open mind, prepared to fundamentally review how the IPCC works, we would regain confidence in the organisation.”

Read more at the Times

Advertisements

108 thoughts on “UK Greenpeace director calls for new IPCC chairman – meanwhile Pachy comments on the use of makeup

  1. NO! Keep PAC-man around. I like all the monsters chasing him, especially since he seems to be out of power-pills. Very entertaining.

  2. Where are they going to find another railroad engineer who can write science fiction as well as romance novels?

  3. coaldust.
    I agree with above.
    Greenpeace can see they are losing the AGW argument and want someone more sympathetic to their heavily funded Idealism

  4. This is not to be lauded. This is just a coverup of the systematic distortions presented by the IPCC. Greenpeace CEO just this year admitted that dangers needed to be exaggerated in order to reduce economic output.
    The problem is NOT the boss. The problem is in the structure of the orgainization. If nothing else, climategate taught us that.

  5. This is soooo primitive. The old alpha wolf getting tossed out of the pack. Absolutely primal. Strange coming from a bunch who consider themselves the very epitome of civilized behavior. Guess the old reptile brain is still alive and kicking.

  6. At this point, it will not matter one bit.
    That’s like blaming the president, and ignoring congress.
    Between CRU, Mann, NASA, the IPCC/UN.
    They might as well have Howdy Doody.

  7. Does this mean the IPCC is so corrupt and discredited that it should be abolished and a new organization should be given the work of gathering real scientific research on climate?

  8. Jeff Id (18:10:37) :
    This is not to be lauded. This is just a coverup of the systematic distortions presented by the IPCC. Greenpeace CEO just this year admitted that dangers needed to be exaggerated in order to reduce economic output.
    The problem is NOT the boss. The problem is in the structure of the orgainization. If nothing else, climategate taught us that.
    Perhaps Greenpeace should just chase whaling boats and not get involved with Global warming or cooling issues.
    Each to their own.

  9. Nooooo. Keep him on as chairman.
    We need these charlatans kept in the public view for a while yet .
    Maybe the MSM may start asking questions.

  10. Jeff Id (18:10:37) :
    “This is not to be lauded. This is just a coverup of the systematic distortions presented by the IPCC. Greenpeace CEO just this year admitted that dangers needed to be exaggerated in order to reduce economic output.
    The problem is NOT the boss. The problem is in the structure of the orgainization. If nothing else, climategate taught us that”.
    No Jeff, it’s the mission of the organization
    It’s a Government supplier of semi scientific garbage only to justify the political process of Cap & Trade and World Government.
    Make the politicians look good!
    The real problem lies with our own Government institutions that financed all this crap.

  11. Ok, we accept their claim, but only if they also sack their own board of directors for unfounded alarmism.

  12. I still say, after all the hand waving at the IPCC, CRU, Penn State and in the pro-AGW MSM, the fix is in. Here in Australia, I think KRudd747 will get his CPRS (ETS) through the senate as some liberal MP’s, like Malcolm Turn(coat)bull, has said he will “cross the floor” to support Labour. I bet he has some vested interest there (As if he weren’t rich enough). Tony Abbott doesn’t appear to be intesreted in listening to reason (Which is not a surprise).

  13. So who is in a position to fire him? Now that Greenpeace says he should be replaced, he surely must go. But who has the hooked cane to pull him off stage?

  14. I never have trusted anything the the UN puts out, now I think folks are starting to realize just how much they should distrust that whole crockpot.

  15. I so need to apologize for my snide comment in another thread suggesting that some article that was the focus of the thread must have referenced a paper by Dr. Seuss. Upon further contemplation, I realize that if the author HAD referred to an actual paper by Dr. Seuss, it would have been BETTER than many articles they had indeed referenced. My bad. Mea Culpa. In that same light, I would like to send Dr. Smut several 5th grade science reports that I am sure he would find enlightening and worth a reference.
    Wait…I just made the same mistake…never mind.

  16. I agree with John. However, I am not as concerned about the blatant mistakes as the near certainty with which IPCC proclaims that AGW has been shown to be correct. The mistakes are consistent with this concern in that they are not random but favor more alarming warming. But my major concern is over-interpretation (IMHO) of the plot of temperatures during the modern era, in which proxies are not necessary. If I understand the graphs and other information correctly, there has been warming since about 1970, but not during the last 10 years. Thus, we have a 30 year period with a clear warming trend and a 10 year period without warming. In other fields of research with which I am familiar, a data set in which 1/4 of the data do not fit the expected trend or in which there is a trend for the first 3 time points but not the 4th would not be regarded as sufficient to make any firm conclusions or predictions.
    Having said this and at the risk of moving slightly off topic, I would also like to suggest that accusations without solid, direct evidence against the AGW supporters, which are common on this blog (and others), hurt the cause of skepticism. Use of words like lie, fraud, conspiracy and assigning motives like promoting world government to making money are counterproductive. In the absence of solid evidence (at least in most cases), this makes it seem as though skeptics are not any more objective and evidence-driven than the AGW supporters. What’s more, this the invective is not necessary.
    “Hide the decline” does not have to be interpreted as a conspiracy to lie in order to be recognized as outside the realm of accepted practice in science. Stopping the plot of the line representing the proxy data just when it begins to diverge from the measured temperatures seems to me to be outside the realm of acceptable practice. It doesn’t matter if it was designed to intentionally deceive or if it was part of a conspiracy.
    Just two cents worth from someone who paid no attention to this issue until November of last year.

  17. No what it means is that the ship is sinking so fast it is necessary to jettison everything possible in the hopes of remaining afloat in some kind of seaworthy condition.
    It can work at sea but in a political collapse like this is it only opens up more breaches for the sea to come in.
    It is a purely cynical exercise in skin saving which sometimes works for small scandals.
    We are watching a wreck in progress but whether any vestige of AGW or even much f the green movement can be salvaged from it remains to be seen.
    There are those who think the Green, political, and financial lobby is too big to fail.
    Time will tell.
    Kindest Regards

  18. Keep in mind that the IPCC is a UN organization. Look at the oil for food scandal that involved the then head of the UN and his family as well as others. Did the UN take any action? No, the circumstances were covered up.
    Does anyone believe that the UN can run anything without corruption. Even many of the Peace keeping operations have gone astray. Look at the problems they ignore in Africa. Look at how they allow dictators to have responsible positions and how Chavez, Castro, and the head of Iran give speaches and are applauded by many of the UN Members.
    Don’t let the UN run the organization if it is re created.

  19. “The IPCC needs to regain credibility. Is that going to happen with Pachauri [as chairman]?”
    Funny, the IPCC itself is the problem. It’s the thing that contains all the errors.
    So Greenpeace will make Pachauri the scapegoat so they can distract attention away fro the IPCC report. And then announce now that the problem, Pachauri, has been dealt with let’s get back to dealing with the solid science that’s in the IPCC reports and tax every aspect of evil mankind.

  20. Factually, Greenpeace and similar organizations are used to being advocacy groups. They are not used to being scrutinized as governmental organizations. The IPCC has received a free ride in this regard for 10+ years. But, blogs such as WUWT and the myriad others who have exposed the corrupt foundations of the IPCC, have scared Greenpeace like organizations.
    They had gotten used to having their government sponsored sugar-daddy. I think they now see that their status on the world stage is threatened. and thus, they need to try and force out the figurehead of their troubles. Lucky for them, their figurehead appears the sacrificial figurehead is also a bit of a whack job, so asking for his ouster is fairly easy.

  21. Anyone with “good judgement” would shut the whole scam down. An “IPCC director with good judgement” is a contradiction in terms.

  22. “The IPCC needed a new chairman who would hold public confidence by introducing more rigorous procedures,…”
    We can have either ‘more rigorous procedures’ or IPCC. Take your pick. They cannot coexist.

  23. Help save Pachauri! At least long enough for him to go down with the ship.
    …………… Or maybe drag down the ship down. 🙂

  24. Dr. Bob (18:01:09) :
    Yikes. If Greenpeace is speaking out against the IPCC/Pachauri
    The IPCC is not the target of this rabid organization. Pachauri is.
    Look at this line in the post:
    “If we get a new person in with an open mind, prepared to fundamentally review how the IPCC works, we would regain confidence in the organization.”
    They want the IPCC to look shiny and new again. They want to lay all the dirt on Pachauri’s head. They will mindlessly chew him up to save ‘manmade global warming’. Global warming is the best thing they’ve ever had. They actually put guilt over modernization into the mainstream of life with it. They are keeping electricity out of Africa with it. They are trying to reduce population with it. The IPCC has brought them successes they have never experienced before.
    There are many things Greenpeace will sacrifice in pursuit of protecting ‘mamnade global warming’ and the IPCC.
    Pachauri is in their frenetic crosshairs. Now he himself will feel what they have done to many scientists in recent years.

  25. Steve Goddard (19:02:20) :
    Anyone with “good judgement” would shut the whole scam down. An “IPCC director with good judgement” is a contradiction in terms.
    Will (19:05:04) :
    We can have either ‘more rigorous procedures’ or IPCC. Take your pick. They cannot coexist.
    ================================================
    Exactly!!
    This whole thing about removing Pachauri is damage control by Greenpeace.

  26. Mike U.K. (18:24:07) :
    Jeff Id (18:10:37) :
    This is not to be lauded. This is just a coverup of the systematic distortions presented by the IPCC. Greenpeace CEO just this year admitted that dangers needed to be exaggerated in order to reduce economic output.
    Perhaps Greenpeace should just chase whaling boats and not get involved with Global warming or cooling issues.

    =================================================
    I don’t think they’re going to leave that Mike. They got their foot into the door of mainstream life with it. They will go kicking and screaming bloody murder to let global warming go.

  27. To my mind the issue is not the science. I agree with Pachauri that it is robust, and we have seen confirmation of that on some issues such as the Amazonian rainforest and long term threats to glaciers. The issue is the bullying and hypocrisy. Reasonable people get shouted down as flat earthers and the public gets lied to about the purity of the peer reviewed literature behind the report.
    The IPCC has put out a release to try to justify the grey literature. Well, here is a litmus test. Has any skeptical grey literature been used in the IPCC fourth report? Thought not. In which case, how was the grey literature selected? It can only have been because it matched the authors’ preconceptions.
    Pachauri must go. He believes it is okay to patronize and lie to the public, and the IPCC seems incapable of learning, from the many examples, what an incredibly bad idea that is.

  28. Let me get this straight — the UK Director of GREENPEACE is saying “The IPCC needs to regain credibility”? …like his own organization, presumably? This no longer borders on ludicrous.

  29. Let’s get back to the basic argument folks – how does a gas that is .035% +/- of the atmosphere cause a global crisis and hockey sticks?

  30. Anthony, I recommend that you spearhead a “save our Love Guru” petition. Skeptics of the world – unite! Don’t let Greenpeace, Andrew Weaver, and other hysterics change the IPCC chair and claim all is well. As Jeff said, this organization reeks with the stench of incompetence, dishonesty, confirmation bias, and religiosity from top to bottom. For crying out loud, the Love Guru is the one thing this organization has going for it – all hands on deck to save him!

  31. fascinating, especially given the second link to TERI Press Release of 15 JAN and the involvement of Prof Syed Iqbal Hasnain. guess it doesn’t prove the carnegie money went thru, but….
    3 Feb 2010: DNA India: Carnegie Corporation of New York denies funding Teri
    Susan King, vice president for public affairs, at the corporation, told DNA Carnegie had not paid any grant to the centre or Teri.
    “In September 2008, we approved a $500,000 grant to the Iceland-based Global Centre towards research on water-related security and humanitarian challenges to South Asia posed by the melting Himalayan glaciers. It was a one-time grant,” King said in New York on Tuesday.
    “No funds have been paid to the centre as the grantee (the centre) told us not to send it because of political and economic challenges facing Iceland,” King said. ..
    DNA was unable to get a confirmation from the centre that it had declined the grant.
    http://www.dnaindia.com/world/report_carnegie-corporation-of-new-york-denies-funding-teri_1343008
    15 Jan 2010: TERI Press Release: TERI Collaborates with Iceland in the Fields of Glaciology and Soil Science
    President of Iceland HE Dr. Ólafur Ragnar Grímsson initiates the collaboration between scientists in Iceland, India and the United States…
    Looking at the unfolding scenario in the mountains and the immediate need for scientific collaboration and research on this issue, University of Iceland in collaboration with The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) and the Carnegie Corporation of New York have joined hands to work in the fields of glaciology and soil science, and will enable Indian scientists and students to seek training in Iceland and the United States. The purpose of this joint effort is to improve understanding of the effects of climate change on the Himalaya and the manifold consequences that follow for the possibilities of water management and food production on the plains below..
    Present on the occasion was the President of Iceland HE Dr. Ólafur Ragnar Grímsson, Dr RK Pachauri, Director-General TERI, and the joint teams from– University of Iceland, Ohio State University and the TERI Glaciology team, headed by Prof Syed Iqbal Hasnain…
    Elaborating on the Himalayan scenario and explaining that TERI has already started working in the area of receding glaciers, Prof. Syed Iqbal Hasnain, Distinguished Fellow, TERI said “Himalayan region holds the key to Indian ecological and social security by virtue of its being the centre for biological and cultural diversity, the final destination of its life sustaining monsoon, and storehouse for snow and glaciers and other natural resources. However, global warming by long lived and short lived climate forcers is adversely affecting the Himalayan cryosphere, impacting food and water security for 1.3 billion people. This collaboration will provide latest information on status of Himalayan glaciers to the policy makers.”…
    Media contact details
    Rajiv Chhibber, Manager Communications,
    The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI)
    http://press-releases.techwhack.com/45351-teri-5

  32. Let me get this straight — the UK Director of GREENPEACE is saying “The IPCC needs to regain credibility”? …
    Well I read it carefully and I think what they meant was that the IPCC needs a new leader who can restore the credibility of AGW. Slight difference…. they aren’t backing down, just regrouping. When the team isn’t scoring enough goals, you can’t fire the whole team. You start by putting in a new coach.

  33. Why is Ban Ki Moon being let off the hook?
    This scandal has occurred under his watch and he is fair game for being responsible for Dr Wonderful.
    I think Ban is letting His Hair take the fall on this one.

  34. Such requests will fall on death ears because Pachauri is not the only one with similar views in the UN. In fact I’d be surprised if anyone in the UN has opposing views, at least of sufficient numbers to make a difference even if he is kicked out. No, the next step is to have these clowns brought to justice and if found guilty (easy I believe) put behind bars. It’s the only way to short circuit the whole AGW scam.

  35. Dr. Ben W (20:42:31) :
    Let’s get back to the basic argument folks – how does a gas that is .035% +/- of the atmosphere cause a global crisis and hockey sticks?>
    I can explain that one. I’ve been in sales for 30 years. A while ago I noticed a sharp decline in the math skills of new hires. I once had a salesman with a double honors degree in business from an accredited university repeatedly sell things for less than their cost. No matter how I tried to explain it, he could not perform a simple gross profit calculation. The last straw was an invoice with a single line item that he totaled incorrectly. We’re not even talking arithmetic anymore, we’re talking about a double honors degree who can’t COPY.
    Extreme example? Obviously. But when I try and explain thermodynamics to soomeone, I frequently think I am getting through only to have them ask a question like… “but the planet is CLOSER to the sun in summer, that’s why its warmer, right?”
    The education system is producing graduates who can’t perform basic math and who have no critical thinking skills. Someone with lots of feathers in their hair, strange objects on a necklace, and lots of letters in their title emerges from a smoke filled tent and says in a serious voice “spirits are angry. we must give them all our gold to appease them. Pile gold in my tent, hurry!” and they go oh, glad someone knows what to do.

  36. I want a better world. I want to save the rain-forests (all trees come to that), I want to clean up rivers. I want less pollution. I want to to save endangered animals/fish/coral.
    I do not want scientists trying to con me and I certainly do not want eco fascist lobby groups like Greenpeace (and I speak as an ex-paid up member back when it began) trying to con me either.
    This (including the Guardian and BBC efforts ) smells to me as a blind to slow down the truths that have been tumbling out for the last two weeks. If that should be so, do people like Roger Harrabin, BBC, (I still cannot believe he approached Anthony!) Fred Pearce, Guardian etc think we are going to go away or change our sceptical viewpoint?
    These people from the lobby groups and MSN are the ones who have fed us lies and stirred the soup of AGW for years. I am sorry but I just do not feel like saying, ” Fair enough, you got it wrong, lets kiss and make up”!
    (Sorry if that was OTT Anthony)

  37. The powers that want to control the world by reallocating wealth through carbon credits will not let him fall because he knows too much about the inner working of the scam. The last thing they want is someone blabbing about how they are going to steal money from the rich for themselves and how they plan to tell the starving masses in the undeveloped countries that it failed because the rich didn’t give enough. Worse than that Pachauri could start naming names.

  38. All this is very interesting, but meanwhile, we’re seeing global average temperatures right now (as in Feb. 2/3 2010) that are at what would normally be seen in late March and early April.
    See: http://discover.itsc.uah.edu/amsutemps/
    I stand by my contention that it is very likely that 2010 will be the warmest year on record (unless we have a Mt. Pintubo type volcanic eruption). With January coming in far warmer globally than normal, we are well on our way…but keep up all your jabbing and jabbering, and group AGW denial-think…as the world slowly warms…
    (Disclosure: I personally think that the world would be cooling right now, based on the very quiet sun we’ve had with the Interplanetary AP index so very low, etc., but the combined effects of both increased CO2 and methane are countering even the quiet sun. Also, I’m not completely convinced that a warmer world would be all that bad…but that doesn’t prevent me from seeing the data for what it is. Even with some human error and outright poor judgement on the part of certain scientists, the lower part of the atmosphere, up to about 46,000 feet is definitely warming dramatically. The oceans abilitiy to absorb the excess CO2 from human activities is decreasing, and we have at least 4 or 5 degrees C increase already cooked into the system by about 2100. Now, is that a bad thing? I’m not convinced about that…yet.)

  39. The Caveman Love Guru is our decades version of Baghdad Bob. Its shocking how quickly we have moved from denial of the content of the emails, to wholesale bus chucking. Who is left on the team these days?

  40. I vote he stays. What better leader for this staid, contemplative, impartial body of world renowned researchers than a fine railway engineer turned climate profiteer turned romance/soft porn novelist?
    Who better to impart credibility to a cadre of activists and eco zealots? Remember the Brad Pitt tinsel trailer? The slightly frozen grim reaper on her horse?

  41. *IT’S WORSE THAN WE THOUGHT*. The references page at http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch14s14-references.html has “a few goodies”…
    1) This is a press release…
    > Allen, J., 2003: Drought Lowers Lake Mead, NASA. [Accessed 09.02.07:
    > http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Study/LakeMead/ ]
    2) Associated Press, 2002: Rough year for rafters. September 3, 2002.
    3) BC Tourism Sector Monitor!!!
    > BC Stats, 2003: Tourism Sector Monitor – November 2003, British
    > Columbia Ministry of Management Services, Victoria, 11 pp.
    > [Accessed 09.02.07: http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/pubs/tour/tsm0311.pdf ]
    4) A business magazine site
    > Business Week, 2005: A Second Look at Katrina’s Cost. Business
    > Week. September 13, 2005. [Accessed 09.02.07:
    > http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/sep2005/nf20050913_8975_db082.htm ]
    5) A newspaper article
    > Butler, A., 2002: Tourism burned: visits to parks down drastically,
    > even away from flames. Rocky Mountain News. July 15, 2002.
    6) “Better Roads” magazine?
    > Stiger, R.W., 2001: Alaska DOT deals with permafrost
    > thaws. Better Roads. June, 30-31. [Accessed 12.02.07:
    > http://obr.gcnpublishing.com/articles/brjun01c.htm ]
    7) Another newspaper article
    > Welch, C., 2006: Sweeping change reshapes Arctic. The Seattle Times. Jan. 1 2006. [Accessed 12.02.07:
    > http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002714404_arctic01main.html ]
    8) Another newspaper article. See
    http://www.nytimes.com/1999/07/08/nyregion/aftermath-heat-wave-neighborhoods-cold-showers-rotting-food-then-lights-then.html?pagewanted=1
    > Wilgoren, J. and K.R. Roane, 1999: Cold Showers, Rotting Food, the
    > Lights, Then Dancing. New York Times, A1. July 8, 1999.

  42. Roger Knights (18:50:59) :
    The Little Engine that Couldn’t
    Fat, Inflated, Behemoth Engine that Couldn’t
    More and more evidence VR games = toys of the infantile.

  43. R. Gates (22:20:47) :
    All this is very interesting, but meanwhile, we’re seeing global average temperatures right now (as in Feb. 2/3 2010) that are at what would normally be seen in late March and early April.
    See: http://discover.itsc.uah.edu/amsutemps/
    Even with some human error and outright poor judgement on the part of certain scientists, the lower part of the atmosphere, up to about 46,000 feet is definitely warming dramatically.

    Plotting 1999, 2003, 2005, 2007 and today at 7.5km, 400mb you see standard variation of .5C Nothing dramatic about it. What IS dramatic is the denial of scientific tampering by “adults” who know better.

  44. Maurice Strong?
    George Soros?
    Pachauri?
    Greenpeace, WWF, NWF, and other NGO’s?
    All bit players — impotent in themselves to do anything.
    It is a convergence of power and greed, motivated by power and greed, whose unstated but understood end is more power and greed. The crisis du jour — (Fill in the blank) — is just a means to those ends. Just pick your crisis — AGW, SARS, Bird Flu, Swine Flu, Overpopulation, Resource Scarcity, blah, blah, blah. Defeat AGW and another imaginery threat will take its place. Whether it is a self-appointed elite or a ruling class (or both), their driving force is power and greed — keeping it and denying it to others (the so-called common man).
    This convergence gives rise to a monster with no real center, no clear target at which to aim, which has been mankind’s burden for many thousands of years. The first major defeat to this monster happened in the 18th century when a bunch of middle class colonists, tired of English mercantilism, rose in rebellion. The rich and powerful colonists? A few offered intellectual guidance but most weren’t the drivers of that rebellion, they just went along for the ride for as soon as it seemed to founder in late 1776, they were ready to make peace with England. It was the so-called common man – the middle class – that wanted freedom from the monster of power and greed and they kept up the fight until their goals were realized and a new, free country arose which soon had a constitution that was meant to hamstring the monster, and it worked and a vast middle class rose and prospered while power was spread out and diffuse. Yes, it worked quite well — for awhile, until some of its internal safeguards were breached.
    So now who’s the villain?
    Brown?
    Obama?
    Rudd?
    Again, all impotent. None of them are running the show but all are taking advantage of the crisis of the moment to increase their power, spurred on by greed. It’s no wonder that Congress laughed when Obama spoke about climate change in his State of the Union speech. They know. It’s not about climate change but about increasing power and tax revenues. The crisis du jour is just a handy cover.
    Get rid of Pachauri? Someone else will take his place.
    Get rid of IPCC? Something else will take its place.
    Depressing, isn’t it?

  45. R. Gates,
    Nothing will convince anybody now that any “official” data were not falsified to serve the political agenda. The bubble has popped, the train is gone. You can bet all you wish (since you don’t seem to put your money where your mouth is), it doesn’t matter any more.

  46. If that isn’t the pot calling the kettle black, I don’t know what is!
    So while Greenpeace is at it, maybe they might want to step aside, seeing as how they hijacked Patrick Moore’s good-natured attempt to raise awareness on real environmental problems.
    Or are they, too, waiting til after they write their own smut? I can just see it now, too…
    “Trees– Not Just For Hugging Anymore!”
    “Everything You’ve Wanted to Know, But Were Afraid to Ask (how to do more for whales than save them)”
    “Naughty, Naughty Skeptic– A Dominatrix’s Guide on How-to Mount Rushmore” (certain radio pundits may take offense at this one, ahem…)
    “Golden Showers in the Rainforest”
    I could go on and on, but I won’t!

  47. R. Gates (22:20:47) : “I stand by my contention that it is very likely that 2010 will be the warmest year on record (unless we have a Mt. Pintubo type volcanic eruption)”.
    I’m not usually an antagonistic person, especially in a forum I respect, but…
    I’ve always wondered what kind of detergent you people use for that brain-wash of yours. Whatever it is, it must have a heavy amount of bleach, turning grey matter to white, and white to that nice, crumbling quality from being soaked for too long.
    I mean, I know it’s still early to say, this being January and all, but… Warmist year on record?!
    Come off it!
    We’ve “had” so many of those over the last decade, but for some reason I’ve used my air-conditioner less over many of those years, especially the last summer. And if the commodities bubble hadn’t popped, I probably wouldn’t have as much heating in this cold, cold winter we’re experiencing (this is, therefore, the warmest winter I’ve had in a good long while, but that has more to do with markets than the climate, obviously).

  48. Leon Brozyna (00:24:04) : ” The crisis du jour is just a handy cover. ….
    Get rid of Pachauri? Someone else will take his place. …. Get rid of IPCC? Something else will take its place. …. Depressing, isn’t it? ”
    Leon,
    Cheer up. It is depressing perhaps if you look at it only as a fight on one specific politic issue then just plodding on to the endlessly next specific political issue. But it is not depressing if you look at it as being the fundamental grand battle for ~2500 years between two fundamental philosophies within the Western Civilisation. It is the greatest battle ever fought and cheer up because there has been significant progress since the medieval supranatural dark ages to a more reason based philosophy. Enjoy the grand battle, it will never end. It is the great constant human endeavor.
    You may be thinking we are retreating back to the supranatural medieval dark ages, but objectively we are not. And I am not an optimist, i’m not, not, not.
    John

  49. Damage limitation by Greenpeace. But the damage is bigger in a way. It has to do with the green propaganda itself. — See, something curious happens when you watch green programme after green programme about how energy intensive and “evil” modern infrastructure is — I began to realise just how vast and important and essential the global system has become. It is essential to life. It is vast and intricate and when analysed for efficiency, they find it looks like natural systems that optimise. And that converted me to be a firm modernist.
    The anti-modern Green mantra is that, if only people could just realise, have “insight” into how much we consume, we’d quit and go “local”. But for most people, I wonder that the opposite might happen; we’ll actually start to understand our global infrastructure, and appreciate it, and improve it.
    It is very hard for the greens to argue with something like the internet. They are too busy using it themselves. Eventually the penny will drop.

  50. R. Gates (22:20:47) :
    “…but the combined effects of both increased CO2 and methane are countering even the quiet sun…the lower part of the atmosphere, up to about 46,000 feet is definitely warming dramatically…The oceans ability to absorb the excess CO2 from human activities is decreasing, and we have at least 4 or 5 degrees C increase already cooked into the system by about 2100…”
    Look at the facts. Earth is a warm, wet, greenhouse planet. There has been ice on its surface for less than 20% of its history, and in the geological past there have been six great ice ages. Two ice ages were characterized by ice at the Equator, and with sea levels falling by up to 5,000ft. Now that is what I call sea-level change!
    Five of the ice ages saw a far higher atmospheric carbon dioxide content than at present. So carbon dioxide could not have caused past climate changes. Indeed, early Earth had 1,000 times more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than now, (yes, you read that correctly, 1,000 times more carbon dioxide than today’s megre 0.0314%) – yet there was no runaway greenhouse effect, or “tipping points” or “acid oceans”. [By the way, has anybody counted the number of “tipping points” predicted by the media doom-mongers? There must have been at least 40 in the last 15 years, yet, unlike the “tipping points” we are all still here.]
    When the Earth as we now know it was formed, the initial source of the two main greenhouse gases, water vapor and carbon dioxide, was volcanoes. Water vapor is still the main greenhouse gas. Once oceans formed and life appeared, carbon was then recycled between the oceans, atmosphere, soils, life and rocks. Carbon dioxide is a plant food, not a pollutant.
    Human activity produces only 3% of the world’s carbon dioxide emissions each year. One volcanic belch can emit as much as that in a day. Carbon dioxide has a short life in the atmosphere and is absorbed by natural processes that have been taking place for billions of years.
    At the normal past rates of absorption, even if we burned all fossil fuels on Earth, the atmospheric carbon dioxide content would not double.
    In past ages carbon dioxide has been naturally absorbed into everything from limestone reefs to soil, rocks and living things. For example, limestone is a very common rock and contains 44% carbon dioxide. Dissolving carbon dioxide in ocean water has not created “ocean acidity”. The constant chemical reactions between ocean water and sediments and rocks on the sea floor have kept the oceans alkaline. When we run out of rocks on the sea floor, then the oceans might become acid. Don’t wait up for that!
    The lower part of the atmosphere “up to about 46,000 feet” is not warming at all, in fact it’s cooling. Where are you getting your facts? Methane would be a greenhouse gas, but the story all goes wrong because it is so unstable and breaks down too quickly to have any significant effect. As for “at least 4 or 5 degrees C increase already cooked into the system by about 2100”, what on Earth are you talking about? “Cooked into”? Is this some new scientific climatic process you have gone and discovered all by yourself?

  51. Re: Tom in Texas (20:07:14) :
    Do Greenpeace or WWF receive any taxpayer $$?

    Yes, lots. WWF report-
    http://assets.panda.org/downloads/annualreview_2008.pdf
    30.9m euros in 2008 from Governments and Aid Agencies
    Greenpeace don’t list any direct Government grants in their report. Both NGOs state reasonably large losses from investments blaming the recession. Presumably both invest in the green technologies they champion so have a vested interest in trying to maintain the value of those investments. Not sure if the SEC would consider this to be pumping stocks but seems a conflict of interest to me. If scepticism continues to increase, the value of their investments will continue to fall.

  52. Greenpeace must be doing some damage limitation. If their research referenced in IPCC and ridiculed by the media it makes them look bad. They are throwing Pacman under the bus as a diversion.

  53. Meanwhile back in Haiti, the UN is showing off its sheer ineffectiveness in the face of tragedy. Supplies are flowing into UN warehouses, with little going out. The Haitian government, long known for corruption, with policies that have devastated their end of the island they share with the Dominican Republic with no recovery in sight, has been allowed to take control of the aid operations. Resulting in monumental inefficiency with suffocating bureaucracy which will certainly result in more people dying. It’s a safe bet that there are Haitian officials requiring bribes to allow aid to be shipped and distributed.
    And there is, of course, the increasing violence. The Blue Helmets will be jumping right on that as well as usual.
    Will someone explain to me again why colonialism is a bad thing? Seems taking over for at least a decade may be the best thing to fix this country and give the Haitians a better life for the long term. Provided the UN stays out of it.

  54. Lindsay H (00:48:57) :
    When Greenpeace is honest enough to call itself Redpeace we might make some progress

    I’ve read science fiction where they had become GreenWar. Drop the pandering and posturing for donations and public sympathy, openly merge with Earth Liberation Front (ELF), and voila!

  55. Robinsolana (18:20:16) :
    Does this mean the IPCC is so corrupt and discredited that it should be abolished and a new organization should be given the work of gathering real scientific research on climate?

    For what purpose should “a new organization should be given the work of gathering real scientific research on climate?” You do realize the present IPCC has no authority to make any assessment whatsoever which may dispute or deny human-induced Global Warming and Climate Change?
    The IPCC was established in 1989, but the First World Climate Change Conference (1stWCC) had already decided human-induced Global Warming and Climate Change was a foregone conclusion and fact ten years earlier in 1979. The IPPC was established to determine only the extent of the climate change and what efforts the Conference of Parties (member states of the United Nations) would take to mitigate the effects of the alleged climate change. The IPCC has never been given the authority or mission to assess or even question the previously concluded existence of Global Warming, Climate Change, and a human-induced cause for them.
    If you abolish the IPCC, you must also abolish and/or radically reorganize the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC), Conference of the Parties (COP), United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), World Meteorological Organization (WMO), and much more. Those organizations established and support the present organization, activities, and policies of the IPCC; and they are responsible for assuming and declaring the existence of human-induced climate change and Global Warming as a foregone conclusion in 1979.
    The IPCC was created by political organizations for the purpose of organizing international efforts supporting governmental, scientific, and other activities which are designed to mitigate human-induced climate change. The IPCC was never intended nor used to determine whether or not there really is any significant human-induced climate change in existence which needs such extensive and deletorious mitigation efforts.

  56. greenpeaces latest mail out is using Global warming to push the Copenhagen CO2 story still.
    in truth the lack of animals grazing the undergrowth and stopping clearing in populated surrounds of rural towns and a couple of firebugs had More to do with it than they will fess up.
    yes we have huge and nasty fires somewhere here almost every year, its a Fact of life in Aus and it has NOT got any worse due to Warming. more due to inept and biased super green goofiness, our parks themselves are huge risk areas, and its quite often the fires start there and no one can get into stop them.
    Power lines fall over, so do trees fall on lines, lightning stikes.

  57. I think ‘aMINO aCIDS iN mETEORITES’ got it right first time..
    ‘So Greenpeace will make Pachauri the scapegoat so they can distract attention away fro the IPCC report. And then announce now that the problem, Pachauri, has been dealt with let’s get back to dealing with the solid science that’s in the IPCC’.
    There’s an AWFULL AWFULL lot of wishful thinking in this blog…..
    There is too much invested in AGW from big pensions to the careers of major scientists…
    Don’t hold you breath for the end of AGW . It may happen in 10yrs or so, and only then very quietly.
    Remember the meteor that wiped out the dinosaurs, the fossil record said that the dinosaurs took over 1 million years to die out..not ten… Did anybody listen to the science ? No, this myth is still perpetuated.

  58. The important point here is that the groups interests are diverging. While everybody agreed to present the most alarmist message and the cash flow was not scrutinised they could all agree. That time is gone. The infighting begins.

  59. Wow
    United we stand, divided we fall – does this mean that the wwf will now attack greenpeace for calling into question the credibility of the IPCC? I am hoping for some good infighting to take place. If not, they’ll all have to sing the same tune – sown with the ipcc

  60. IPCC-junk science crooks: Including Canadian Maurice Strong, the UNabomber.
    …-
    “IPCC: International Pack of Climate Crooks
    American Thinker ^ | February 04, 2010 | Marc Sheppard
    Unquestionably the world’s final authority on the subject, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s findings and recommendations have formed the bedrock of literally every climate-related initiative worldwide for more than a decade. Likewise, virtually all such future endeavors — be they Kyoto II, domestic cap-and-tax, or EPA carbon regulation, would inexorably be built upon the credibility of the same U.N. panel’s “expert” counsel. But a glut of ongoing recent discoveries of systemic fraud has rocked that foundation, and the entire man-made global warming house of cards is now teetering on the verge of complete collapse.
    Simply stated, we’ve been swindled. We’ve been set up as marks by a gang of opportunistic hucksters who have exploited the naïvely altruistic intentions of the environmental movement in an effort to control international energy consumption while redistributing global wealth and (in many cases) greedily lining their own pockets in the process.
    Perhaps now, more people will finally understand what many have known for years: Man-made climate change was never really a problem — but rather, a solution.
    For just as the science of the IPCC has been exposed as fraudulent, so have its apparent motives. The true ones became strikingly evident when the negotiating text for the “last chance to save the planet” International Climate Accord [PDF], put forth in Copenhagen in December, was found to contain as many paragraphs outlining the payment of “climate debt” reparations by Western nations under the watchful eye of a U.N.-controlled global government as it did emission reduction schemes.
    Then again, neither stratagem should come as any real surprise to those who’ve paid attention. Here’s a recap for those who have, and a long-overdue wake-up call for those who haven’t.
    The Perfect Problem to the Imperfect Solution
    The U.N. signaled its intent to politicize science as far back as 1972 at its Conference on the Human Environment (UNCHE) in Stockholm, Sweden. There, an unlikely mélange of legitimate environmental activists, dyed-in-the-wool Marxists, and assorted anti-establishment ’60s leftovers were delighted to hear not only the usual complaints about “industrialized” environmental problems, but also a long list of international inequities. Among the many human responsibilities condemned were overpopulation, misuse of resources and technology, unbalanced development, and the worldwide dilemma of urbanization. And from that marriage of global, environmental, and social justice concerns was born the IPCC’s parent organization — the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) — and the fortune-cookie like prose of its socialist-environmentalist manifesto, the Stockholm Declaration.
    It was seven years later that UNEP was handed the ideal villain to fuel its counterfeit crusade. That was the year (1979) in which NASA’s James Hansen’s team of climate modelers convinced a National Academy of Sciences (NAS) panel to report [PDF] that doubling atmospheric CO2 — which had risen from 280 ppmv in the pre-industrial 1800s to over 335 ppmv — would cause nearly 3°C of global warming. And although the figure was wildly speculative, many funding-minded scientists — including some previously predicting that aerosols and orbital shifts would lead to catastrophic global cooling — suddenly embraced greenhouse gas theory and the inevitability of global warming.
    It was at that moment that it became clear that the long-held scientific position that the Earth’s ecosystem has always and will always maintain CO2 equilibrium could be easily swayed toward a more exploitable belief system. And the UNEP now had the perfect problem to its solution: anthropogenic global warming (AGW).
    After all, both its abatement and adaptation require huge expansion of government controls and taxation. Furthermore, it makes industry and capitalism look bad while affording endless visuals of animals and third-world humans suffering at the hands of wealthy Westerners. And most importantly, by fomenting accusations that “rich” countries have effectively violated the human rights of hundreds of millions of the world’s poorest people by selfishly causing climate-based global suffering, it helps promote the promise of international wealth redistribution to help less fortunate nations adapt to its consequences.
    Best of all, being driven by junk-science that easily metamorphoses as required, it appeared to be endlessly self-sustaining.
    But it needed to be packaged for widespread consumption. And packaged it they surely have. Here’s an early classic. ” (more)
    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2444063/posts

  61. John Whitman (01:17:14)
    You’re right. You caught me in one of my rare ‘down’ moods.
    While the conflict predates them and covers all cultures, it’s really an intellectual war — Plato’s overwhelming mysticism vs. Aristole’s (mostly) rationality.
    A good breakfast of donut and a cold coke gave my morning a real lift – or at least a sugar rush.

  62. Pachauri’s full quote was even more crazy: “They are people who deny the link between smoking and cancer; they are people who say that asbestos is as good as talcum powder – I hope that they apply it to their faces every day – and people who say that the only way to deal with HIV/Aids is to screen the population on a regular basis and isolate those who are infected.”
    I’ve never even heard anyone suggest that asbesto be used as talcum powder, or that HIV victims should be rounded up and quarantined. I don’t think a single person here or any other skeptic would claim that cigarettes are not connected to all sorts of health problems including cancer.
    This guy is a total loon willing to make claims at the drop of a hat. No wonder the IPCC report was full of nonsense. The guy doesn’t think like a scientist he thinks like some kind of conspiracy theorist. Next he’ll be telling us the WTC towers were demolished with explosives by the US government.

  63. @ John Whiteman
    “It is the greatest battle ever fought and cheer up because there has been significant progress since the medieval supranatural dark ages to a more reason based philosophy. Enjoy the grand battle, it will never end…”
    I thought that was the battle between the English and ‘our sweet enemy’, the French…

  64. @Kate (01:48:44) :
    Thanks Kate for that very useful exposition. I have copied and pasted this as a document that I can use with my believer friends as a basis for a discussion on the science, not theology.

  65. Greenpeace has twigged if a little late in the day that Pachauri is the sceptics best friend, so he has to go to in order to try to get the AGW gravytrain back on the rails
    Yes the talcum powder reference is to Christopher Booker’s long campaign against the ‘white asbestos is a killer’ scam, see
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1531446/Christopher-Bookers-Notebook.html
    and many other articles by him on the topic in his ST column
    It was of ocurse Richard North working with his regualr ‘partner’ Chris Booker who exposed all Pachauri’s financial affairs a few weeks ago, stuff which first appeared in the MSM in Booker’s column

  66. Re: amicus curiae (03:59:10) :
    yes we have huge and nasty fires somewhere here almost every year, its a Fact of life in Aus and it has NOT got any worse due to Warming. more due to inept and biased super green goofiness, our parks themselves are huge risk areas, and its quite often the fires start there and no one can get into stop them.
    Power lines fall over, so do trees fall on lines, lightning stikes

    Well said, but while urban environmentalists with little or no practical experience of land management run the shop, little will change. But to add to the increasing risks, another twisted fire starter here-
    http://www.epaw.org/multimedia.php?lang=en&article=a7
    Being 100m+ tall, rather difficult for firefighters to deal with. There’s some other nice images of turbine failures on that site as well.

  67. jack morrow (06:20:55) :
    Everyone probably remembers years ago signs starting appearing across the USA saying, ” GET US OUT OF THE UN”. We should have heeded their advice

    It’s up to you. That building is in New York…just get a few trucks with feathers and tar and do it the old American Way!!

  68. The UN is a dream whose time has ended, again. If you think of it as I do, as merely a worthless “League of Nations II”, then it’s time has definitely long since ended, again. No doubt humanity will go on to re-dream this Utopian dream over and over again for the next thousand years, or two. Maybe someday in the not too distant future, humans will have finally arrived at the point that it will work. I doubt that whatever “it” is will look anything like it does today.
    As a American, I simply don’t think the United States can afford to waste anymore money or mental energy on it, we’re broke, we’ve blown our life savings (and the inheritance of our children and grandchildren) on stupid social engineering projects and foreign policy screwups and need to focus on the reality of the day: getting back to work, rebuilding our economy so we can make a small profit, paying off the Chinese loansharks and the Arab Shieks, and saving a little for those cold rainy days that seem to be coming more and more frequently. Maybe, just maybe, we can also get rid of Department of Education and the NEA and send our kids to some decent private schools the way all the rich folks do.
    Of course, we can always do what the Romans did and not worry about all that silly stuff….

  69. Choo-choo Pachauri is handing out grooming advice? Has that guy looked in a mirror recently? What a mess.

  70. If greenpeace want him out it`s because he doesn`t wear his hairshirt with enough conviction. Could anyone ever be green enough for greenpeace?

  71. Related Scientific Fraud Topic–
    2 days ago Lancet– the UK’s leading left-wing medical science journal– fully withdrew it 1998 paper “associating” childhood vacines and autism. After 11 years the editors found no scientific or statistical basis for the claim. The author of the 1998 paper (who runs a major autism treatment clinic in Texas — quelle suprise) told AP, don’t blame me, my paper only suggested a possible “link” that was worthy of long-term study, Lancet and the media ran away with the story and overstated the case. The Lancet tradegy is that because idiot parents bought this junk science over the past 12 years, who knows how many children suffered disease because they weren’y immunized. Fortunately, because vaccines are a discrete medical issue, real scientists were able to ultimately disprove the junk science. AGW is a much more complex issue, but I have confidence that one day, the alarmists’ scientific fraud will be proven, and Nature, Scientific American et al, will all have to withdraw their thousands of alarmist ‘peer reviewed’ articles as false and disproven.

  72. Pachauri responded that Greenpeace should think loooong and hard about what it is saying. That they should succumb to the warm musky embrace of IPCC funding… to feel the warm breath of mother GAIA on their supple …
    Wait, what are we talking about again?

  73. My guess for the date of Pachauri’s resignation, February 19th. Anybody else have a guess….John…

  74. The IPCC is chartered to support AGW. They are to collect and promote information on the effects of AGW. It doesn’t matter who is in charge. Unless they are dissolved the organization will continue to promote AGW. They have no incentive to do otherwise.

  75. I think Dr R K Pachauri is counting the days until he’s forced to resign – 14 February seems a good day. I don’t think he’ll be the only one forced to leave; a CAGW Valentines Day massacre perhaps?

  76. India’s setting up of its own Climate Commission, and its veiled threat to withdraw from the IPCC, are (I think) intended to provide the push to get Pachauri out. I think the push will be successful. The UN can’t ignore it.

  77. Among the animals that eat their own kind: the ratsnake, sliverfish, the spadefoot toad, giant squid, hermit crabs, the praying mantis, snails and slugs, catfish, piranas…

  78. Brian Macker (05:13:27) :
    Pachauri’s full quote was even more crazy: “They are people who deny the link between smoking and cancer; … and people who say that the only way to deal with HIV/Aids is to screen the population on a regular basis and isolate those who are infected.”
    I’ve never even heard anyone suggest … that HIV victims should be rounded up and quarantined.

    Monckton suggested it, when the infection was in its early stages and might have been nipped in the bud. He’s since conceded that it would be impractical now, but he defends his suggestion by saying that it would have worked then.
    Cuba has a quarantine policy.

    I don’t think a single person here or any other skeptic would claim that cigarettes are not connected to all sorts of health problems including cancer.

    The Heartland institute, and other free market institutes, have criticized second-hand smoke legislation as being an unjustified extrapolation from findings of second-hand smoke affecting spouses of smokers. This has been turned into a smear that they “deny the link between smoking and cancer.”
    In addition, Lindzen, who smokes, does deny the link between smoking and cancer, and I think I read somewhere that Singer not only believes that but also helped the tobacco industry make that claim way back when. (Please correct my errors.)

  79. Ref – Roger Knights (10:36:55) :
    “India’s setting up of its own Climate Commission, and its veiled threat to withdraw from the IPCC, are (I think) intended to provide the push to get Pachauri out. I think the push will be successful. The UN can’t ignore it.”
    ________________
    Think you’re correct on all but: “The UN can’t ignore it.” They’ve been doing pretty well so far. I don’t think they have a clue what’s happening, nor do I think they care about anything except (perhaps) tonight’s menu and the ballet and their escourt’s ensamble. Remember, these people think they’re the crem d’la crem d’la crem of the Earth. What India or anyone else thinks is of no concern to them a’tall.

  80. Instead of a new IPCC chairman the world needs to dismantle the UN bureaucracy and the UN itself. Period.

  81. The “sages” speak out:
    “Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake, the use of fossil fuels, electrical appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning, and suburban housing – are not sustainable.”
    – Maurice Strong, opening speech at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit

    “A massive campaign must be launched to de-develop the United States. De-development means bringing our economic system into line with the realities of ecology and the world resource situation.”
    – Paul Ehrlich, Professor of Population Studies

  82. With no insinuations intended politically regarding Pachauri, it was the case that the Allied command during WW2, especially just after D-day, were not all that keen on plots to assassinate Hitler: he was a hopelessly blundering military commander and was, because of this, regarded as an asset to the Allied war effort.

  83. Pascvaks:
    Remember, these people think they’re the crem d’la crem d’la crem of the Earth.

    Cream of Gumbo soup, more like.

Comments are closed.