Greenpeace vs. IPCC

[eagleseven]

UK Greenpeace Chief Calls on Pachauri to Resign

The head of the UN’s climate change body is under pressure to resign after one of his strongest allies in the environmental movement said his judgment was flawed and called for a new leader to restore confidence in climatic science.

Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), has insisted that he will remain in post for another four years despite having failed to act on a serious error in the body’s 2007 report.

John Sauven, director of Greenpeace UK , said that Dr Pachauri should have acted as soon as he had been informed of the error, even though issuing a correction would have embarrassed the IPCC on the eve of the Copenhagen climate summit.

A journalist working for Science had told Dr Pachauri several times late last year that glaciologists had refuted the IPCC claim that Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2035. Dr Pachauri refused to address the problem, saying: “I don’t have anything to add on glaciers.” He suggested that the error would not be corrected until 2013 or 2014, when the IPCC next reported.

The IPCC issued a correction and apology on January 20, three days after the error had made global headlines. Mr Sauven said: “Mistakes will always be made but it’s how you handle those mistakes which affects the credibility of the institution. Pachauri should have put his hand up and said ‘we made a mistake’. It’s in these situations that your character and judgment is tested. Do you make the right judgment call? He clearly didn’t.”

The IPCC needed a new chairman who would hold public confidence by introducing more rigorous procedures, Mr Sauven said. “The IPCC needs to regain credibility. Is that going to happen with Pachauri [as chairman]? I don’t think so. We need someone held in high regard who has extremely good judgment and is seen by the global public as someone on their side.

I generally don't agree with Greenpeace, but even they recognize what a fraud the IPCC has become, and how it undermines the credibility of the entire environmentalist movement.

 

[Old Rocks]

If one is intelligent enough to follow what is really happening in climate science, you would have read the Copenhagen Diagnosis.

The Copenhagen Diagnosis

The IPCC report was far too conservative. All of the parameters in which it made predictions, it has been wrong. The warming has proceeded far faster than the estimates.

The melting of the arctic ice is right off the chart in the worst possible way.

The melting of the permafrost, and the resultant emissions are far greater than was predicted.

The Arctic Ocean Clathrates have started outgassing, and that was not supposed to happen until the end of this century, maybe even later than that.

The sea level rise is on the upper edge of the probability cone, and maybe off it by now.

The East Anarctic was supposed to gain a bit of ice because of increased precipitation. They have the increased precipitation, but the melt exceeds estimates to the point that the East Antarctic is also losing ice by the giga-ton.

And 2010 looks to be one of the hottest on record, maybe the hottest, until 2011.