Early last week, the United Nations’ International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was forced to admit that its longstanding contention that the Himalayan glaciers would be melted away by 2035 was not, as previously claimed, based on a peer-reviewed scientific study. Rather, it was based solely on a single published article, the author of which admitted that his theory was entirely speculative in nature, and which did not in fact include any sort of date by when the glaciers would disappear.
Several months after this outright fraudulent claim was brought to its attention by a group of real climate scientists, the head of the IPCC, Raj Pachauri, in making his admission, claimed that the IPCC did not know the flimsy nature of this information when the decision was made to include it in its own “authoritative” report.
But wait, the story gets better.
Mr. Pachauri’s claim was itself rendered fraudulent on Sunday morning when Dr. Murari Lal, the coordinating lead author of the section of the IPCC report dealing with Asia, admitted he knew the melting glacier claim was flimsy at best, entirely baseless at worst, when he made the decision to include it in his report. To make matters even worse than that, Dr. Lal went on to admit that he made that decision solely for political reasons, to wit:
“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. It had importance for our region, so we thought we should put it in.”
So, to summarize, the initial report on the melting glaciers was without any real scientific underpinning; the authors of the IPCC report made the decision to include it knowing it was without any scientific merit, adding in a fake date certain in order to render it more sensational and attention-grabbing; the main author of the IPCC report now admits he did so purely for political reasons; and the current head of the IPCC lied about the reasons why the fake information was included in the report when he was forced to admit that the information was fake to begin with.
But wait! There’s more!
On Saturday, it was revealed that the famous Al Gore/IPCC claim that the mythical man-caused global warming would lead to an increase in the number and severity of hurricanes, earthquakes, tornados and natural disasters was also based on a single unpublished study that also had not been peer-reviewed at the time of its inclusion in the IPCC report and Gore’s famous fictitious film, “An Inconvenient Truth”. The study has since been subjected to the peer-review process, and the peers obviously had a problem with its “findings”, given that they insisted upon including the following caveat: "We find insufficient evidence to claim a statistical relationship between global temperature increase and catastrophe losses."
Oops.
Now, that caveat along with the entire peer-reviewed report was published way back in 2008, but the UN/IPCC is just now getting around to admitting there’s a problem with their sensationalistic claims – doing so only when forced by real climate scientists – issuing the following statement on Saturday: "We are reassessing the evidence and will publish a report on natural disasters and extreme weather with the latest findings. Despite recent events the IPCC process is still very rigorous and scientific."
Yeah. Uh-huh. Sure it is. We all believe that, right?
The author of the paper himself, Dr. Robert Muir-Wood, stated that "The idea that catastrophes are rising in cost partly because of climate change is completely misleading.” Hooboy, Dr. Muir-Wood will obviously be excluded from the invitation lists for future Church of Global Warming cocktail parties after making that admission. Honesty obviously has no place where the IPCC and its reports are concerned, and purveyors of such must be socially shunned as a penalty for their bad behavior.
One IPCC scientist, Prof. Christopher Field of California’s Carnegie Institute, protected his own status on the invitation list while unwittingly pointing to the real problem with IPCC including baseless, sensationalized claims in its reports purely for political reasons when he said, “Science is progressive. If something turns out to be wrong we can fix it next time around.”
Of course, the unadmitted problem with that statement by Dr. Field is that the IPCC has made great use of these and other most likely false claims in its full court press effort to convince the governments of the developed world to spend trillions of dollars and destroy their own economies in a Quixotic effort to address a problem that most likely does not even exist. If we wait until the "next time around" to fix such fraudulent claims, the damage might already have been done. Look at how close the U.S. congress came to using the IPCC fraud as a basis for implementing a senseless cap and trade system on carbon dioxide in 2009, a move that would rob more than $2 trillion from the U.S. economy over the next ten years.
The false façade of Pope Al, the IPCC and the Church of Global Warming is being steadily chipped away, dying the proverbial death of a thousand cuts. Such a fate could not possibly happen to a nicer and more deserving bunch of people.
No comments:
Post a Comment