What Glacier Shrinkage?

Remember the big stink a few years ago by the Global Warming frauds claiming that glaciers were melting so fast that they’d all be gone by 2035? Well, the truth is out. It’s not happening and never was happening. The information used by the IPCC was taken from a popular science magazine printed seven years earlier concerning an interview with an Indian scientist who admits he was speculating. No evidence. No peer review. Just a speculation from a single person who had no data to support his speculation.

The Times Online reported this new bit of information this weekend. (why is it always on a weekend?) Here is a portion of that report. You can find the entire article here.

World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown

The west Himalayan range includes 15,000 glaciers

(Simon Fraser/Science Photo Library)

The west Himalayan range includes 15,000 glaciers

A WARNING that climate change will melt most of the Himalayan glaciers by 2035 is likely to be retracted after a series of scientific blunders by the United Nations body that issued it.

Two years ago the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued a benchmark report that was claimed to incorporate the latest and most detailed research into the impact of global warming. A central claim was the world’s glaciers were melting so fast that those in the Himalayas could vanish by 2035.

In the past few days the scientists behind the warning have admitted that it was based on a news story in the New Scientist, a popular science journal, published eight years before the IPCC’s 2007 report.

It has also emerged that the New Scientist report was itself based on a short telephone interview with Syed Hasnain, a little-known Indian scientist then based at Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi.

Hasnain has since admitted that the claim was “speculation” and was not supported by any formal research. If confirmed it would be one of the most serious failures yet seen in climate research. The IPCC was set up precisely to ensure that world leaders had the best possible scientific advice on climate change.

Professor Murari Lal, who oversaw the chapter on glaciers in the IPCC report, said he would recommend that the claim about glaciers be dropped: “If Hasnain says officially that he never asserted this, or that it is a wrong presumption, than I will recommend that the assertion about Himalayan glaciers be removed from future IPCC assessments.”

The IPCC’s reliance on Hasnain’s 1999 interview has been highlighted by Fred Pearce, the journalist who carried out the original interview for the New Scientist. Pearce said he rang Hasnain in India in 1999 after spotting his claims in an Indian magazine. Pearce said: “Hasnain told me then that he was bringing a report containing those numbers to Britain. The report had not been peer reviewed or formally published in a scientific journal and it had no formal status so I reported his work on that basis.

“Since then I have obtained a copy and it does not say what Hasnain said. In other words it does not mention 2035 as a date by which any Himalayan glaciers will melt. However, he did make clear that his comments related only to part of the Himalayan glaciers. not the whole massif.”

The revelation is the latest crack to appear in the scientific concensus over climate change. It follows the so-called climate-gate scandal, where British scientists apparently tried to prevent other researchers from accessing key date. Last week another row broke out when the Met Office criticised suggestions that sea levels were likely to rise 1.9m by 2100, suggesting much lower increases were likely.

Incompetence, lies and speculation. Is this the current scientific methodolgy that is now accepted by the scientific community?

I’m struck by the thought how Galileo was persecuted for heresy because his statements that the Earth circled the Sun ran counter to the established view that all spacial bodies circled the Earth. Galileo had observable fact to support his case. His accusers of heresy had none.

Yes, we’re returning to the age of the Luddite. Led by the uncaring to pursue a personal political agenda. Typical for liberals. Next, they’ll be telling us we can tax ‘n spend ourselves into prosperity.

Oh, wait! They already have.

1 thought on “What Glacier Shrinkage?

Comments are closed.