It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

+45 more 
posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 08:14 AM

World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown

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.
(visit the link for the full news article)

Mod Edit: Review This Link: Instructions for the Breaking News Forums: Copy The Exact Headline

[edit on 1/17/2010 by semperfortis]

posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 08:14 AM
The latest and most detailed scientific research = ... wait for it... a google search? AND, they didn't even check the background (or maybe they did but included it anyway).

To me, this is even more damning than the email fiasco. The whole basis for the IPCC, IN THE FIRST PLACE, is that they were to be reporting peer reviewed research - not someone's admitted "speculation" that admittedly was NEVER backed by ANY formal research yet was reported as formal research.

We demand better references than that on ATS!!

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.
(visit the link for the full news article)

Mod Edit: Review This Link: Instructions for the Breaking News Forums: Copy The Exact Headline

[edit on 17/1/2010 by Iamonlyhuman]

posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 09:03 AM
Well i still think raising taxes and not leaving your tv on stand-by
is the only way to save the world

posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 10:09 AM
This is really embarrassing for the IPCC

New Scientists, who originally published the story, are even trying to wash their hand of this thing by demanding an explanation from the IPCC:

But there is some confusion as to the origins of the claim. New Scientist seems to believe that their 1999 article was the original source, but apparently it originates from a 1996 study that claims the glaciers would be gone by 2350

Mr Cogley says it is astonishing that none of the 10 authors of the 2007 IPCC report could spot the error and "misread 2350 as 2035".


The question then becomes who "misread" 2350 as 2035?

The most likely explanation seems to be the "leading Indian Glaciologist" who is the source for the New Scientist article:

The article quoted Syed I Hasnain, the then chairman of the International Commission for Snow and Ice's (ICSI) Working group on Himalayan glaciology, as saying that most glaciers in the Himalayan region "will vanish within 40 years as a result of global warming"

Boy, this just keeps getting better

+12 more 
posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 10:32 AM
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman

So, truthfully, is anyone surprised that the IPCC bases their 'scientific' conclusions on speculations and not facts? Anybody?

posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 11:09 AM
Oh come on, why would the UN lie to us?

They're here to save the world, remember?
That's not a lie, they just didn't say WHO they were saving it for: the elites. That means not you and not me.
I hope this totally crashes their plans for cap and trade as well as a world-wide tax on internet payments, etc.
If you see blue helmets on your street don't believe for a second they are there to help you.

posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 11:36 AM
Shady shenanigans and data manipulation to portray "climate change" as something different to its reality?

Surely not...They wouldn't would they?

Seriously though,anyone whos been keeping up with the AGW theory knows what these disinfo agents are up to.
This just confirms my belief that the whole thing is another financial scam,with the bonus side effect of furthering the planned global government of corporate fascists and thier police state,through the new super religion that is Global warming.

All anyone has to do is look at the graph of the big picture-say about 65million years,to see that we are being fed a royal crock of crap on a daily basis.

That does it for me-not that I am saying we should all carry on burning the earths resources,and polluting the oceans.All I am saying is the reasons and evidence we have been repeatedly presented with are a big pile of steaming BS.
What was it Himmler/Goering said about how easy it is to make the masses believe a lie just by repeating it often enough?

posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 12:43 PM

Originally posted by TinFoilBat
Well i still think raising taxes and not leaving your tv on stand-by
is the only way to save the world

Tell me, where are our tax dollars going to go ? How is paying the elite gonna stop the false claims of global warming ? I agree with using less electricity and not leaving your tv on all day will do more for the environment but paying criminals that make false claims wont do sfa.

posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 01:08 PM
about the energy saving...
each nation has a quotum of co2 output..if they exeed it they have to pay the extra...

so if the households save energy... the industry can use moore energy without paying for it...
so youre savings goes straight into the pockets of the stockholders..

youre energy bill wo'nt be lower couse the government is rising the taxes on energy ...

you now.. energy sector is in privat hands the less Kw you use ..the higher the price/Kw will be...

[edit on 17-1-2010 by ressiv]

posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 01:19 PM
We just have to stand by and wait to see what the next scam is. Global Warming is quickly melting down. They have everyone thinking that the hole in the ozone is there and is going to destroy us. I am just waiting til the scientific formally comes out and says that the hole can't protect from solar flares unless we let it start repairing itself. No more electronics unless you belong to a premier family in which you are allowed to pay a high tax.

posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 01:34 PM
Global warming alarmist all have a fundamental problem, their wrong, because their conclusions are based on junk science. I honestly don't know why people keep listening to this scientist when it is a know fact that scientists fabricate data when their data fails to prove the earth is warming.

In my opinion these scientist are nothing more than scam artists because they share data with each to see how they can massage the data to meet a preconceived conclusion, then hide it from "real" scientists that are skeptical.

posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 01:43 PM

Originally posted by Ferris.Bueller.II
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman

So, truthfully, is anyone surprised that the IPCC bases their 'scientific' conclusions on speculations and not facts? Anybody?

Come on, the last real scientific discoveries were back in the 1800's. There is no independant science/media/government/............NOTHING not even our minds!

posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 02:19 PM
It does not mater that the Himalayan glaciers are not melting down.

The story is now out there and the AGW people will keep quoting it forever.

I will bet that someone will quote they are melting here at ATS within 6 months because they never read this thread or heard of the story.

The AGW people know the public is stupid and will repeat any of there fake data forever as truth.

posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 02:25 PM
This IPCC panel is also the panel that shares the Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore.
The Nobel was awarded in 2007 to the IPCC and Al Gore, for this very report!!!

Carnegie scientists Chris Field and Ken Caldeira of the Department of Global Ecology are key contributors in the UN panel awarded the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize on October 12 for work on global climate change. The International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) shares the prize with former vice president Al Gore for his role in communicating the issue to the public.


Following a press conference about the prize with Gore in Palo Alto, California, Field said: “It’s fantastic to have the Nobel Committee recognize the importance of the climate issue, and it’s important that the Nobel committee recognizes that effective action requires a partnership between a great communicator like Al Gore and the scientific community that provides the information that we need to move ahead.”

From click for proof

Absolutely amazing!

posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 02:37 PM
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
I posted the New Scientist link last week in a couple of "Ice Age" threads in response to a well-known ATS AGW "preistess."
New Scientist:Debate Heats Up Over IPCC Melting-glaciers Claim

Who needs the "leaked emails" when the IPCC lead author on glaciology says they use "grey literature" (not peer-reviewed), and "absolutely rejected" the truth about the 100% false "scientific consensus" the IPCC published as fact?

Chapter 10 of the report says: "Glaciers in the Himalaya are receding faster than in any other part of the world."
The inclusion of this statement has angered many glaciologists, who regard it as unjustified.

Not just unjustified, but created in the face of controverting facts.

... [T]he lead author of the IPCC chapter, Indian glaciologist Murari Lal, told New Scientist he "outright rejected" the notion that the IPCC was off the mark on Himalayan glaciers. "The IPCC authors did exactly what was expected from them," he says.
"We relied rather heavily on grey [not peer-reviewed] literature, including the WWF report," Lal says. "The error, if any, lies with Dr Hasnain's assertion and not with the IPCC authors."

Except, Dr. Hasnain, never published any such conclusion.

Hasnain rejects that. He blames the IPCC for misusing a remark he made to a journalist. "The magic number of 2035 has not [been] mentioned in any research papers written by me, as no peer-reviewed journal will accept speculative figures," he told New Scientist. "It is not proper for IPCC to include references from popular magazines or newspapers," Hasnain adds.

He gave an interview to New Scientist that was "spun" by the WWF, and used by the IPCC. It is now part of the "scientific consensus" and "settled science" of AGW faithful.

Deny ignorance


[edit on 17-1-2010 by jdub297]

posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 03:17 PM
I can't help but notice a few of our more vocal proponents of AGW seem to be missing in action.

posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 03:18 PM
I also posted this article as an update here.

As I said there, what is the point in reading anything anymore?

I suppose one positive thing on this particular subject is that it isn't true after all. It's nice to know that the impending doom is not so impending.

[edit on 17-1-2010 by loam]

posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 05:59 PM
When I was 16 years old I visited Juneau Alaska and walked on the Mendenhall Glacier. That was 33 years ago. In that time, the glacier has receded a small amount compared to its entire length. Here is a Google map showing how little it has moved:

Glacier Retreat

I believe that this small retreat is because of the normal warming trend we have been following since the "Little Ice Age." This trend is normal for the planet, and glaciers most obviously retreat, otherwise the entire earth would be completely covered in ice by now. Think of the vast ice fields going across northern America, above the terminal murrain. Aren't you glad that ice retreated? Well, I would imagine that the people in Canada, Ohio, Michigan, etc. are glad

posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 06:07 PM

Originally posted by TinFoilBat
Well i still think raising taxes and not leaving your tv on stand-by
is the only way to save the world

is this a joke? if so its not clear it is, if not

yes yes i think thay should take even more money form us aswell. just for what ever thay want to waste it on. thats a most excellent idea

maby if thay used OUR money better in the first place then we could all have solar power and turbines for free off the gov

thay = goverment

posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 06:12 PM
18 posts 38 flags...You know what that tells me?
People are just too dumbfounded for words.
Good Work!
These GW nazis have some nerve dont they?
Do they REALLY think people are that stupid to where they will just say "whatever you say is true"?
Many are like that, Yes, only because they have not yet woken up to the fact that their govt does NOT have their best intentions at heart.

Once again..Good work.
I cant wait for all of the debunkers of debunking GW come out.
Did that make sense? Oh well. It stays, you got the drift.
100 stars-10000 flags for you.

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in