web analytics


By ATWadmin On January 31st, 2010

I see that is revealed today that The United Nations’ expert panel on climate change based claims about ice disappearing from the world’s mountain tops on a student’s dissertation and an article in a mountaineering magazine.

“In its most recent report, it stated that observed reductions in mountain ice in the Andes, Alps and Africa was being caused by global warming, citing two papers as the source of the information.

However, it can be revealed that one of the sources quoted was a feature article published in a popular magazine for climbers which was based on anecdotal evidence from mountaineers about the changes they were witnessing on the mountainsides around them.

The other was a dissertation written by a geography student, studying for the equivalent of a master’s degree, at the University of Berne in Switzerland that quoted interviews with mountain guides in the Alps.

The revelations, uncovered by The Sunday Telegraph, have raised fresh questions about the quality of the information contained in the report, which was published in 2007.

It comes after officials for the panel were forced earlier this month to retract inaccurate claims in the IPCC’s report about the melting of Himalayan glaciers.”

Settled science? The essential issue here is to mistake the IPCC as any sort of scientific body. It is not. It is central to the UN and is a political body with a clear agenda. In pursuance of these politicak ambitions any old nonsense is reconstructed to “prove” the AGW agenda.

8 Responses to “EVEN MORE HOT AIR…”

  1. And the article goes on to say
    This week scientists from around the world leapt to the defence of the IPCC, insisting that despite the errors, which they describe as minor, the majority of the science presented in the IPCC report is sound and its conclusions are unaffected.

    Or They also insisted the overall findings of the report are robust despite the minor errors.

    Now I realise that sceptics will leap on this as more evidence that the whole AGW is a scam. What it actually is is not that at all, but a small bad part of a report, and not part of the key findings of the report.
    And yes, it is bad because it undermines confidence and it allows people to make political capital. And let’s be honest, we would all do the same if the shoe was on the other foot – so you have to take the blows.
    It is certainly true that the AGW science has taken some knocks of late – mainly through bad scientific practice – the fallibility of man.
    The underlying theory (and it is a theory) remains – in the opinion of people I believe to be good scientists – sound.

  2. Described as minor and defended by "scientists" with their snouts in the AGW trough?

  3. An interesting report this week suggests that water vapour may be playing a more active role in temperature changes:

    "The research, led by one of the world’s top climate scientists, suggests that almost one-third of the global warming recorded during the 1990s was due to an increase in water vapour in the high atmosphere, not human emissions of greenhouse gases. A subsequent decline in water vapour after 2000 could explain a recent slowdown in global temperature rise, the scientists add."

  4. water vapor has been and always will be the number one green house gas, it is also impossible at this point for man to measure it world wide at any given moment which puts both the warming and cooling sides in the same state. They are dealing with planetary ecological and environmental systems taht are yet out of mans control. We are barely a level 1 race of beings that kind of science is a level 2 race.

    We have a vast amount of science to learn before we can reach a level 2 society as I said we are on the cusp of a level 1, the odds of reaching that are weighted very heavy against us.

  5. We have a vast amount of science to learn before we can reach a level 2 society as I said we are on the cusp of a level 1, the odds of reaching that are weighted very heavy against us.

    Agreed. We will self-destruct long before then.

  6. here is an interesting article some of you might find enlightening

  7. Interesting stuff GMT.

    But a bit speculative. My guess is that we will be lucky to survive this century on this planet.

  8. This spoof of climate science may be of interest:


Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.