Roger Harrabin of the BBC writes:
UN climate chief resignation call
Several environmentalists, UK MPs and scientists has called for the resignation of Rajendra Pachauri, chair of the UN’s climate science body.
Dr Pachauri, head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has in the past been criticised by climate “sceptics”.
They have claimed that some of his comments had become politicised.
Pressure increased recently when a report recommended that IPCC chairs serve only a single term of office.
Dr Pachauri has yet to comment on the matter.
The IPCC chair is into his second term and several leading scientists and green thinkers contacted by BBC News say he should quit now.
The list includes Tim Yeo, chairman of the all-party Commons Climate and Energy Committee; Professor Sir Brian Hoskins, the Royal Society’s climate change head; and Mike Hulme a former IPCC lead author.
Mr Yeo told BBC News: “Dr Pachauri has become a liability – he is now causing more harm than good. Climate science needs a guarantee of utmost reliability, and Dr Pachauri can no longer guarantee that. It would be as well if he stepped aside.”
Professor Hulme said: “Whatever merit his leadership of IPCC has had in the past, Dr Pachauri is unfortunately now associated with controversy and error in the IPCC AR4.”
“As clearly implied by the IAC Review, a new chair for AR5 would bring fresh vitality and a new respect to the IPCC.”
…
The BBC understands that if Dr Pachauri is determined to hang on to the job, his post is safe for a while at least. A UN source said developed countries were keen to strike a deal on biodiversity, so would not be prepared to upset developing countries by calling for resignation of a high-profile Indian.
The question now is whether Dr Pachauri feels he is still serving the best interests of the IPCC, following such a negative reaction from British greens whom he may have considered to be his friends.
====================================
Full Story at the BBC here
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Salute this man! Pachauri did what no climate sceptic is able to do. A Trojan Horse that destroyed the IPCC from the inside.
If Pachauri did not exist, we climate sceptics would have had to literally invent him. He is in fact every sceptic’s dream. How could we have asked for more when he embodies the UN Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in all completeness? Interestingly, he also strongly epitomizes the typical climate activist and their organizations that they are attached. Did he mould both in his image or its vice versa is however for history to judge.
Next month 194 governments of the IPCC are scheduled to meet in Busan, South Korea. This is where a plot to ouster Pachuari could be unleashed. Pachuari remains defiant: “At the moment, my mandate is very clear. I have to complete the fifth assessment” The Indian Government who Pachuari is their candidate is equally defiant, backing him to the hilt. If Pachauri goes, we leave the IPCC! And if India leaves the IPCC, it can trigger an exodus.
Read More: http://devconsultancygroup.blogspot.com/2010/09/salute-this-man-pachauri-did-what-no.html
They want him to resign, no one wants to upset the Indians
“The IAC recommendation is subtle,” he said. “But it probably would be better for the future of the IPCC if Dr Pachauri were to resign of his own accord, taking great care to ensure that there is no question of India losing face as India is such a major country for mitigation (of emissions) and adaptation (to climate change).”
I am disappointed to see all the WWF motivated ‘save the Pachauri comments’.
However, the suggestion of Phil Jones as a credible successor is a good one. Phil has been cleared of any wrong doing, possesses good organizational skills, and impeccable scientific credentials. If Phil is overlooked for this position, it will be clear that the skeptic community is being given too much sway by the establishment. Muir Russell and Ron Oxburgh would also be potential candidates.
Back to the railway, Rajendra!! Go go go…… 😉
This is a watermellon proposal. Dr.P demonstrably has not overcome scepticism of IPCC conclusions and it is a travesty that he has not, in their opinion. In this, he is their sacrificial lamb.
They could easily have followed the IAC review recommendations and limited his term as chairman but choose to go the route of dishonourable discharge. On reflection, not sacrificial lamb but scapegoat.
Nice people eh?
I’m aghast at the number of people that want Dr Pachauri to leave. I hate to see him go as he and the IPCC have been virtually my only source of amusement for two years. Much better than sit coms or reality TV.
Given the total lack of credibility and wide gulf between “political positioning” and real science, I doubt there are any candidates of any standing at all who would want the job!
Who’d want to don the costume of the climate clown and pretend that people aren’t laughing at them?
I think his credibility is as hollow and flawed as the science he represents.
What more fitting person is there for the job?
Who of integrity would want to pick up such a poisoned chalice?
I 100% agree with ZT, Jones, Russell or Oxburg for the new IPCC head. Imagine appointing any one of those three. They have less credibility than Pachauri.
It would leave the IPCC as a hopeless shell without any scientific basis ……. it would be the worst blow to the `we are all going to die’ crowd since CRU email release. I vote for Jones!
Is it just me, or does his mugshot look like the ones on the playing cards the US used to hand out to soldiers in Iraq?
Just sayin’.
I agree with those who say leave him where he is. He is the perfect representation of the IPCC. Why make him quit now? He can fall when the rest fall.
ZT said
“However, the suggestion of Phil Jones as a credible successor is a good one. Phil has been cleared of any wrong doing, possesses good organizational skills, and impeccable scientific credentials. If Phil is overlooked for this position, it will be clear that the skeptic community is being given too much sway by the establishment. Muir Russell and Ron Oxburgh would also be potential candidates.”
* * *
I’m going to assume this is sarcasm.
After all, nobody could possibly be THAT wrong.
Except the IPCC.
Reminds me of the famous story of Churchill, when presented with a plan to kill Hitler early on, Churchill was reported to have said:”Are you mad? He is our best asset ! They
might replace him with someone who knows what they are doing!”..
Applies to Pachy too…
New and young faces needed at the sulfur smelling headquarters , the only condition: Being progressives up to the last consequences and swore eternal loyalty to the “white brotherhood”. 🙂
Mr Lynn says:
September 23, 2010 at 9:27 am
“The IPCC was established for the express purpose of giving the appearance of scientific legitimacy to a foregone conclusion: that human use of fossil fuels was causing catastrophic ‘global warming’.
Changing its director will not change the agenda of the IPCC. It is a disgrace and it should be abolished. Scientists everywhere should insist on no less.
I agree, the IPCC and the cargo cult scientists who support it are a total disgrace. However, I feel that the IPCC is only working to the UN political brief to prove global warming and so pave the way to an unelected world government with a common carbon (energy) currency.
So I think it is the UN that needs to be abolished, along with the World Bank, IMF, WWF, Council on Foreign Relations, Royal Institute of International Affairs, Soros Foundation, the Bilderberg Group and any other ‘green’ socialist organisation who would put world government before the freedom of the individual.
Please feel free to add any I may have missed to the list 🙂
I’m with the “Let him stay!” camp! I can’t wait to see what the follow-through to his smash porno-rag “Return to Almora” will be….
A movie perhaps? Or sequel? Whatever, the longer he stays in, the more embarrassment he causes!
Pachauri is merely a symptom of the AGW sickness; getting rid of him would do more harm than good. With him in charge (?), the IPPC is doomed!
If he goes, will he take his red silk hanky with him? And will someone wash it?
Just wondering…..
Like a good Captain, he should go down with the ship.
The hanky stays. It is a part of the IPCC charter. To remove the hanky would be tantamount to calling for the dissolution of the UN, the WHO, the EPA, and would cast considerable doubt on AGW.
If the Pachauri campaign should, for some obscure reason falter, and the poisonous skeptics get their way, could I also nominate Gavin Schmidt (Esquire), as a possible contender, based on his extensive diplomatic credentials.
ZT says:September 23, 2010 at 10:39 am
I am disappointed to see all the WWF motivated ‘save the Pachauri comments’.
I’m disappointed to see the IPCC still in operation.
However, the suggestion of Phil Jones as a credible successor is a good one. Phil has been cleared of any wrong doing, possesses good organizational skills, and impeccable scientific credentials. If Phil is overlooked for this position, it will be clear that the skeptic community is being given too much sway by the establishment. Muir Russell and Ron Oxburgh would also be potential candidates.
Is that a joke? Would you welcome the selection of Michael Mann also? Sheesh!
J Felton says: September 23, 2010 at 11:05 am
Is it just me, or does his mugshot look like the ones on the playing cards the US used to hand out to soldiers in Iraq?
After his XXX novel, he considers himself the “King of Hearts”.
I totally agree with AJB (comment at 9:32 am).
The IPCC has a hidden agenda. Their ‘science’ will therefore never be objective.
The only reasonable thing to do is to close it down.
To paraphrase Moonbat: “It was fun while it lasted”.
Well, thanks for spoiling billions of dollars, now please go home and get a new hobby.
Maybe build a greenhouse and start growing cucumbers. Don’t forget to add CO2!
Geico Ad lookalike aside, one can say that ALL of Pachauri’s statements are politicized as everything he says is political. He is just the head of Maurice Strong’s Propaganda machine to make the case for global emissions controls. His job is to deflect or ignore all criticism and continuously protest that he is right, no matter how many ways he is shown wrong.
We can show everything in the IPCC AR4 report to be false and he will still claim that the conclusions are correct. That’s his job.
However, couldn’t they find someone who looks to be in the 21st century? Really.
A picture of him and 10 naked pictures of Madeline Albright would make a great firewall for computers.
As an indication of the diligence that the BBC exercises in researching climate related stories, they (a presenter, not Harrabin)referred this morning to the clamour for the resignation of Professor Pachauri.