Warning based on “speculation” and “no formal research”
17 Jan 2010 – “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,” says this article on Times On Line, written by Jonathan Leake and Chris Hastings.
Were these really “blunders”? Or were they deliberate fraud?
Two years ago the IPCC claimed that “glaciers were melting so fast that those in the Himalayas could vanish by 2035.”
The scientists behind the warning now admit that it was based on a news story in the New Scientist, which was itself based on a short telephone interview with Syed Hasnain, a little-known Indian scientist.
Hasnain has since admitted that the claim was “speculation” and “not supported by any formal research.”
“If confirmed it would be one of the most serious failures yet seen in climate research,” the article continues.
Professor Murari Lal, who oversaw the chapter on glaciers in the IPCC report, said he would recommend that the claim about glaciers be dropped.
Merely dropped? No accountability?
I think the IPCC should be totally dismantled.
Fred Pearce, who conducted the original interview for the New Scientist, said he called Hasnain in 1999 after spotting his claims in an Indian magazine. “Hasnain told me then that he was bringing a report containing those numbers to Britain,” said Pearce. “The report had not been peer reviewed or formally published in a scientific journal and it had no formal status so I reported his work on that basis.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.”
Still, the IPCC used the New Scientist article (non-peer reviewed) as backup for its claim that the likelihood of the glaciers melting was “very high,” with a probability of greater than 90%.
“Glaciologists find such figures inherently ludicrous, pointing out that most Himalayan glaciers are hundreds of feet thick and could not melt fast enough to vanish by 2035 unless there was a huge global temperature rise. The maximum rate of decline in thickness seen in glaciers at the moment is 2-3 feet a year and most are far lower.” (Italics added.)
Lal himself admits that he knows little about glaciers. “I am not an expert on glaciers and I have not visited the region so I have to rely on credible published research,” he said.
The IPCC has yet to explain “how someone who admits to little expertise on glaciers was overseeing such a report.”
“Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC chairman, has previously dismissed criticism of the Himalayas claim as “voodoo science”.
See all of this great article, entitled “World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown”:
Thanks to Craig Adkins (US), Burt Rutan (US), Ray Lynch (Dublin) and Arjan Weijdema (The Netherlands) for this link
A similar article was also posted in the Australian:
Thanks to Kai Ullner for this link
“The west Himalayan range includes 15,000 glaciers,” says the article. I’m guessing that more than 14,000 of these glaciers are not monitored at all. This would mean that we have no way of knowing whether the preponderance of Himalayan glaciers are growing or shrinking.
I’m aware of at least 230 Himalayan glaciers – including Mount Everest, K2 and Nanga Parbatg – that are actually growing.
See links below.
Glaciers Growing in Western Himalayas
24 May 09 – In a defiant act of political incorrectness, some 230 glaciers in the western Himalayas – including Mount Everest, K2 and Nanga Parbat – are actually growing.
See Glaciers Growing in Western Himalayas
Glaciers in western Himalayas thickening and expanding
23 Nov 08 – A study published by the American Meteorological Society found that glaciers are only shrinking in the eastern Himalayas. Further west, in the Hindu Kush and the Karakoram, glaciers are “thickening and expanding”.
See Glaciers in western Himalayas thickening and expanding
Melting Himalayan glaciers – Not an iota of scientific evidence
20 Jan 10 – “The health of the glaciers is a cause of grave concern, but the IPCC’s alarmist position that they would melt by 2035 was not based on an iota of scientific evidence,” says India’s Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh. See: