Christopher Booker writes in the Telegraph:
Next weekend, as delegates from 194 countries gather in South Korea for a crucial meeting of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, their big talking point will be whether the IPCC’s chairman Dr Rajendra Pachauri should resign – as a recent report from the world’s leading scientific academies seemed strongly to hint he should.
The delegates face a dilemma. If they sack him, it would be a serious blow to the reputation of the panel, which has been central to the global warming scare since its founding in 1988. If he stays, it could severely damage the authority of its next major report, due in four years’ time.
…
When we approached Teri Europe with our evidence, the charity’s secretary immediately admitted that there were “anomalies” in the accounts. The Charity Commission agreed to investigate. Not the least point of interest was that the charity’s trustees – “responsible,” in the commission’s words, “for approving the accounts before submission” – included, alongside Dr Pachauri, two other luminaries of the global warming establishment. Sir John Houghton was a founder of the IPCC, and had long played a key role in it. Sir Crispin Tickell was one of Houghton’s most influential allies back in 1988, as “our man at the UN” and as the adviser who talked Mrs Thatcher into enthusiasm for global warming at that crucial moment (a fervour she later disavowed).
Since it seemed that both Teri Europe and the trustees were in serious breach of the Charity Commission’s rules, this has led over recent months to a protracted series of exchanges with the commission.
Read the entire story here at the Telegraph
More also at the EU Referendum
Anyone who followed the U.N. Oil for Food Program knows that the U.N. is just a massive money laundering system on a scale so large that people cannot accept the truth of it simply because it is incomprehensible to imagine a fraud committed so large and so pervasive in front of everyone, in public and no attempt to hide it. AGW is just another example of it. It won’t be the last either. Sad really, really sad.
Dr Rajendra Pachauri should probably resign if he is just another bean counter. The issue is global warming, not money making. And for that matter, the repubs should resign also if they are going to drag the subject into the bean counting realm. The repubs should stick with and prove thier claims that global warming is a hoax. No matter how much money a repub has, it is not going to change the earths climate unless they spend it for that purpose. And if what they claim is true, they won’t have to worry about it anyway. They can bath in thier money and hunt terrorists while they go through your personel information.
I bet this turns out to be like the European Union itself, which has not had its accounts certified and signed off for the last – oh – twelve years.
So the people who advise us to diligently prepare our accounts (for tax purposes) and be scrupulously honest, fail their own advice.
.
I thought I read sometime back that the UN had decided to shorten the official tenure of the office of the IPCC grand poobah and make it retroactive to include Pachauri. The intimation was that Pachauri was to be sent packing very soon through this move.
Anybody else see this?
Much as I despise and detest the guy, for the sake of the sceptics cause, we should start a ‘Save Patchy’ campaign. He has done more to cast doubt on CAGW than the Climategate email leak did!!!
John Whitman 8:48am
“….Put climate study in control of an organization of private research institutions where it belongs”
Just where have you been the last few years? U of E Anglia? Penn State? what research institutions come to mind?
I’d hate to see Pachauri go, because then I’d have no reason to re-post this.
The problem as I see it, does Pachauri’s resignation/termination galvanize the rest to forge agreements in his “honor”? I remember how during the US health care debate how congress tried to use the death of Kennedy to push it through.
By the way, over 13 months without a drink. Congrats Teddy!
Richard North says:
October 3, 2010 at 6:44 am
Your’e right but somehow the nickname Patchy works better for me.
Since the IPCC message is designed to create a crisis so a bunch of people and banks can make fortunes, why shouldn’t the head of the IPCC be the poster child of GREED?
The first time we see the word “Anomaly” used in an appropriate way….
I hope for times when other words like “robust” , “extrapolation” or “peer reviewed” will be correctly used.
That man needs to wash his hair.