Snicker*..IPCC to Withdraw Claim..

Now science is a self correcting endevour. When a mistake, or careless claim is recognized, other scientists jump on it. However, when drugged out radio jocks make whingding statements, or an ersazt wearther man lies on his web site, it never gets corrected.
As the years progress, we shall see how accurate this statement is.


U.N. panel re-examines Himalayan glacier thaw report - Yahoo! News

The IPCC's 2007 report said: "Glaciers in the Himalayas are receding faster than in any other part of the world and, if the present rate continues, the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high if the Earth keeps warming at the current rate."

However, the report also said of the glaciers: "Its total area will likely shrink from the present 500,000 to 100,000 sq km (193,000 to 38,600 sq miles) by the year 2035."


The article from which this was lifted was old at the time of the IPCC Report. What happened to peer review?
 
Now science is a self correcting endevour. When a mistake, or careless claim is recognized, other scientists jump on it. However, when drugged out radio jocks make whingding statements, or an ersazt wearther man lies on his web site, it never gets corrected.
As the years progress, we shall see how accurate this statement is.


U.N. panel re-examines Himalayan glacier thaw report - Yahoo! News

The IPCC's 2007 report said: "Glaciers in the Himalayas are receding faster than in any other part of the world and, if the present rate continues, the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high if the Earth keeps warming at the current rate."

However, the report also said of the glaciers: "Its total area will likely shrink from the present 500,000 to 100,000 sq km (193,000 to 38,600 sq miles) by the year 2035."

So are goofy Radio Hosts self correcting. People come here every day to refute Rush. He puts his words up his website for all to read every day.

The problem here was we were getting bogus numbers and science was not self correcting. People who thought the data was skewed, made up, distorted or pulled out of someones' ass (all four seem to be the case here) were called dangerous Luddites.

It has been my major issue. Or one of them. Those who asked questions were told to shut up, and the whole thing still smacks of self serving sanctimony.

This is the "settled" nature of this science. Which is why I distrusted it.


Well stated. The peer review process at least in this topic area is little more than an echo chamber for the views of the true believers.
 
Mindless derision from the mindless.

Yet the glaciers still are melting.


http://assets.panda.org/downloads/glacierspaper.pdf

Since the early 1960s, mountain glaciers worldwide have experienced an estimated net loss of over 4000 cubic
kilometers of water – more than the annual discharge of the Orinoco, Congo, Yangtze and Mississippi
Rivers combined; this loss was more than twice as fast in the 1990s than during previous decades.


Do you have a satelite map of Florida from then and one from now? How much of Miami Beach is under water now vs. then?
 
GENEVA - Five glaring errors were discovered in one paragraph of the world's most authoritative report on global warming, forcing the Nobel Prize-winning panel of climate scientists who wrote it to apologize and promise to be more careful.

U.N. panel: We erred on glacier warning - Climate Change- msnbc.com

Five problems in one paragraph, but the rest of the report is spot on? Peer review? It either was not peer reviewed or grossly incompetent people were involved. Time after time their snake oil is revealed and yet they hide behind the guise of science.
 
Instead of rock, paper, scissor, the new Climatologist game is glacier, hockey stick, tree ring.

Hockey stick melts glacier, tree ring debunks hockey stick, hockey stick made from tree ring. It's how Settled Science gets that way
 

Forum List

Back
Top