Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 01/18/2010 10:03:21 PM PST by neverdem
One of the key statements in the infamous 2007 IPCC Report, was that the Himalayan glaciers would all melt away by 2035, “if the earth keeps warming at the current rate”. As the current rate is negligible, it is like trying to melt iron ore with a candle held at arm’s length.
The IPCC said the claim was based on a WWF study, and that the likelihood of the glaciers melting was “very high” – in other words “90% probable”!
The Report claimed that the glaciers were receding faster than in any other part of the world.
Here’s the truth – it was nothing but hot air! There was no ‘study’ and no ‘research’. The ideas came from an Indian magazine. A journalist, Fred Pearce, saw the article and telephoned the author, Dr Syed Hasnain, who told him the article was based on speculation, and had no formal research behind it. Yet, this 1999 telephone conversation about a non-existent research made it into New Scientist (not known for its total obedience to scientific proofs). From there it got into the 2007 Report, without challenge. (The Telegraph, 17th January 2010). This happened not because it was science but because it said what the IPCC wanted to hear.
Glaciologists ridiculed the idea, saying the obvious – the glaciers are so thick it would take a massive temperature rise to even begin melting! Meanwhile, rate of melt is normal, if not slower than normal. I knew this before the 2007 Report was published, because responsible scientists published real research reports. But, the IPCC is so political with its own agenda of propaganda, it published a non-existent research paper, ignoring the large file of actual studies saying the opposite!
The Nail That is Ignored
This is yet another nail in the IPCC’s coffin. It...
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
Heartland Institute's summary of Climategate
The World Wrestling Federation did a study on climate change (aka global warming)?! Who knew?!!!
Yes, the 2004 semi-final invitationals between ManBearPig and BawneyFwankenstein led to some new holds and (since outlawed) moves that created quite the stir at the time.
There was no ‘study’ and no ‘research’. The ideas came from an Indian magazine. A journalist, Fred Pearce, saw the article and telephoned the author, Dr Syed Hasnain, who told him the article was based on speculation, and had no formal research behind it. Yet, this 1999 telephone conversation about a non-existent research made it into New Scientist (not known for its total obedience to scientific proofs). From there it got into the 2007 Report, without challenge. (The Telegraph, 17th January 2010). This happened not because it was science but because it said what the IPCC wanted to hear.
If the second paragraph is true, then the first paragraph is even clumsier and more childishly arrogant; for the perpetrators of the fraud assumed either that readers wouldn't check, or couldn't check.
The WWF is part of the IPCC, which is part of the UN.
In other words, the IPCC gave itself "authoritative" credit for something that never happened!
ROTFL! Funny stuff. Climate change nuts deserve to be laughed at.
Global warming is so 1999. Where’s my portable nuclear generator?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.