New Climate Change Scandal - Article in Daily Express Newspaper

An article on the FRONT PAGE of todays Scottish Daily Express newspaper caught my eye this morning.
I never buy this paper, but noticed the headline "NEW CLIMATE CHANGE SCANDAL" and decided to check online for the full article, which can be read here:

Scottish Daily Express Article

The article begins;

FRESH doubts were cast over controversial global warming theories yesterday after a major climate change argument was discredited.

The International Panel on Climate Change was forced to admit its key claim that Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035 was lifted from a 1999 magazine article. The report was based on an interview with a little-known Indian scientist who has since said his views were “speculation” and not backed up by research.

It was also revealed that the IPCC’s controversial chairman, Dr Rajendra Pachauri, described as “the world’s top climate scientist”, is a former railway engineer with a PhD in economics and no formal climate science qualifications...

It then goes on to basically say that so much money is now involved in "climate change" that much of the research supporting the global warming theories cannot be trusted.

I know many people have suspected such things for a while now, but I've never seen it as the front page headline article of a national newspaper before.

I'm guessing that this particular newspapers owners have their own political reasons for publishing this article?

G

Nice find :-)

I think the MSM has realised the game is up.. and time to have one foot in each camp to be on the safe side ;-)

tho I have to admit that I am suprised that it reached the front page and not buried some where in some cul-de-sac

reply to post by Gordi The Drummer

Sadly, the author of the purported 2035/2350 email has long attributed Himalayan glacial loss to local effects of "black soot" from wood and diesel.

The Chinese and Indians have been dumping their excrement into the environment in huge and increasing volumes, and not only at their own expense, but (because of the “global implications”) at everyone else’s as well; including those countries (such as the US) that have taken measures to minimize their “carbon footprint!”

In a new research, scientists in India and China have determined that glaciers in the Himalayas and the Tibetan plateau that feed the river systems of almost half the world's people are melting faster because of the effects of clouds of soot from diesel fumes and wood fires. According to a report in the Guardian, the results of the research, to be announced this month in Kashmir, show for the first time that clouds of soot - made up of tiny particles of "black carbon " emitted from old diesel engines and from cooking with wood, crop waste or cow dung - are "unequivocally having an impact on glacial melting" in the Himalayas.
Once the black carbon lands on glaciers, it absorbs sunlight that would otherwise be reflected by the snow, leading to melting. "This is a huge problem which we are ignoring," said Professor Syed Hasnain of the Energy and Resources Institute (Teri) in Delhi. "We are finding concentrations of black carbon in the Himalayas in what are supposed to be pristine, untouched environments," he added. The institute has set up two sensors in the Himalayas, one on the Kholai glacier that sits on the mountain range's western flank in Kashmir and the other flowing through the eastern reaches in Sikkim.
Glaciers in this region feed most of the major rivers in Asia. The short-term result of substantial melting is severe flooding downstream. Hasnain said that India and China produce about a third of the world's black carbon, and both countries have been slow to act. "India is the worst. At least in China, the state has moved to measure the problem. In Delhi. no government agency has put any sensors on the ground. Teri is doing it by ourselves," he said.
Decreasing black carbon emissions should be a relatively cheap way to significantly curb global warming. Black carbon falls from the atmosphere after just a couple of weeks, and replacing primitive cooking stoves with modern versions that emit far less soot could quickly end the problem. Controlling traffic in the Himalayan region should help ease the harm done by emissions from diesel engines.

www.timesofindia.indiatimes.com...
Scientists who are not concerned with profiting from “AGW” have been saying this for YEARS!

Since this puts the onus on the real culprits, and diverts attention from the cash generating focus on industrialized countries’ CO2 emissions, no one wants to discuss it.

Black carbon, a form of particulate air pollution most often produced from biomass burning, cooking with solid fuels and diesel exhaust, has a warming effect in the atmosphere three to four times greater than prevailing estimates, according to scientists in an upcoming review article in the journal Nature Geoscience. Scripps Institution of Oceanography at UC San Diego atmospheric scientist V. Ramanathan and University of Iowa chemical engineer Greg Carmichael, said that soot and other forms of black carbon could have as much as 60 percent of the current global warming effect of carbon dioxide, more than that of any greenhouse gas besides CO2. The researchers also noted, however, that mitigation would have immediate societal benefits in addition to the long term effect of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
"Observationally based studies such as ours are converging on the same large magnitude of black carbon heating as modeling studies from Stanford, Caltech and NASA," said Ramanathan. "We now have to examine if black carbon is also having a large role in the retreat of arctic sea ice and Himalayan glaciers as suggested by recent studies."

www.www.sciencedaily.com...

Somebody wake up!

jw

How relaiable is a newspaper that takes 6 weeks to report a breaking news story?

The BBC covered this on the 5th December.

reply to post by thoughtsfull


Thanks TFJ!
A foot in each camp!!! I like your take on that!

G

Originally posted by Essan
How relaiable is a newspaper that takes 6 weeks to report a breaking news story?

The BBC covered this on the 5th December.

Hi Essan!

It's NOT reliable at all!! (That's one of the reasons I never buy it)
I was merely pointing out that they ran this story today as their FRONT PAGE headline story!

I've never seen a contradiction of the "climate change is man made" theory, on the front page headline, of a national newspaper before.

Have any of you guys?

I love the gall of these people.

It was also revealed that the IPCC’s controversial chairman, Dr Rajendra Pachauri, described as “the world’s top climate scientist”, is a former railway engineer with a PhD in economics and no formal climate science qualifications.

Then you find out he said this about India's research into it.

Before the weakness in the IPCC’s research was exposed, Dr Pachauri dismissed the Indian government report as “voodoo science”.

Of course this was said before it came out about his qualifications The new snake oil salesmen for the 21st century.

Originally posted by Essan
How relaiable is a newspaper that takes 6 weeks to report a breaking news story?

The BBC covered this on the 5th December.

And just how does the fact that they reported it later than the BBC affect the reliability of the article?

It says pretty much the same thing, just later.

So, how is that unreliable?

It seems there was a bit of straw clutching in your post...

reply to post by Gordi The Drummer


Hi Gordi .. logged in just so I could Star and Flag you for this information

In Australia, politicians are pushing ahead with profitable (for them and for their masters) 'carbon trade' debates, all faithfully reported by the whore media

So special thank you for bringing the Daily Express article to public attention. For every one who knows/knew the 'global warming' claims were all a scam, there remain a hundred who bought it hook, line and sinker. So by posting this article, you've provided yet more evidence which can be utilized by those in the know in order to educate those NOT in the know and particularly those who don't WANT to know and don't want anyone ELSE to know the truth either

Great post

Great info

Thank you

I am all for caring for the environment and cleaning up our wasteful practises but the hysteria surrounding MMGW always made feel it was suspect. The emails were what got me questioning it originally but I admit I was lulled to sleep a little bit when the issue was considered blown out of proportion.

then this news hits and now I feel a fool. Glad to see a paper throwing it out there for everyone to see. Our paper here in town ignores all news challenging MMGW.

Cheers

reply to post by Gordi The Drummer



Hi Gordi

Given the level of interest in Haiti at the moment, this seems a very strange topic to hit the front page at this time, especially positioning it under the banner of being a scandal.

Is it my imagination or have they elevated this above the disaster in Haiti?

Very strange indeed..

S&F for picking it up :-)

regards and best wishes

TFJ

Originally posted by Essan
How relaiable is a newspaper that takes 6 weeks to report a breaking news story?

The BBC covered this on the 5th December.

Does that in any way alter the substance of the report?

I didn't think so.

How telling that you criticize the date of a critical response, as opposed to the substance.

If anything, it reveals the MSM indifference to criticism of the status quo.

jw

I heard about this article today.

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.

www.timesonline.co.uk...
So, let me see if I'm reading this right, they based this off some freakin' article and not from their own research?
This tells me that a lot of the global warming scientists also base their theories on the work of a few, a few that lied and manipulated data to fit their $$$$ agendas.
I wonder if this will help convince any of global warming fanatics that it's just a scam.

reply to post by sickofitall2012


I don't think this will convince either side of anything... but those on the fence may start to dig a little deeper and make their own minds up for a change

Late or not, at lease this is now getting out to people who would normally not see the truth, because they choose to read such papers and news channels, so it might wake a few more people up and start fighting for cheaper fuel as it rightfully ours. Makes me wonder what the AGW freaks are going to say when it all falls in on them.

Given that the prediction was improbable if not impossible, isn't it odd no-one noticed this earlier? Did anyone read the 4AR?

It doesn't change anything about the science though. But plays into the anti-science mobs hands and enables them to increase confusion in the minds of the public and help increase distrust of science.

The Inquistion is alive and well!

reply to post by Essan


It's got nothing to do with "anti-science" and everything to do with people being sick of the propaganda being rammed down their throats.

The pro AGW people are very fond of pointing out whenever some anti AGW proponent has no qualifications in climatology, but are remarkably quiet when it comes to the head of the IPCC, which is the driving force behind the politics of alleged GW.

Given a level playing field, and less quashing and attempts to discredit any dissenting voice, the public would be much better informed.

Of course it just may be that this is what the pro AGW people are scared of and why they resort to the tactics they do.

In the meantime, governments continue to tax us on the basis of being "greener" (and yet less than 1% of taxes raised by this method go to green projects) and people like gore continue to get rich off the back of it, and the scam that is carbon credit trading.

And then you wonder why people distrust what they hear?

reply to post by Essan

The Inquistion is alive and well!

... but article such as this will surely shed light on those inner circles of darkness within it.

You know, it can sometimes be hard to tell which side of the debate you are on. AGW advocates, after all, would definitely include those fine individuals at the CRU who, through their practice of non-transparency, "help increase distrust of science"; the term would also include Dr Rajendra Pachauri of the IPCC, who by lifting speculative claims and asserting them as his own and by means of falsely promoting himself as a 'climatologist' and simultaneously dismissing others' records as 'irrelevant' because they are not 'climatologists', "increases confusion in the minds of the public"; it would also include those who scream the holy phrase "peer-reviewed" while actually talking about shill-controlled media publishing, thereby being part of an "anti-science mob".

Gee, have you changed sides?

TheRedneck

ok...all you anti-GW people should pick up your family and move right next to a coal-burning power plant. that would be the true way of proving that there is no problem with man-made pollution....put up or shut up.
do you think the CEO of Exxon lives right next to one of his refineries???
hell no, he knows how bad the air is....and that's my true test against global warming. put your money (or your life) where your mouth is.

Originally posted by jimmyx
ok...all you anti-GW people should pick up your family and move right next to a coal-burning power plant. that would be the true way of proving that there is no problem with man-made pollution....put up or shut up.
do you think the CEO of Exxon lives right next to one of his refineries???
hell no, he knows how bad the air is....and that's my true test against global warming. put your money (or your life) where your mouth is.

Pointless.

As most people on the planet live in cities where pollution is higher, it's a bit of a moot point.

Besides which, how many people hold their head over a smoky fire.

That would be just silly.

How many pro AGW people live by a crystal clear lake in a mountain glade, surrounded by pristine virgin forest?