Another “Oops” on Global Warming

H/T to my mother and uncle for making me aware of this:

The U.N.’s leading panel on climate change has apologized for misleading data published in a 2007 report that warned Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035.

In a statement released Wednesday, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said estimates relating to the rate of recession of the Himalayan glaciers in its Fourth Assessment Report were “poorly substantiated” adding that “well-established standards of evidence were not applied properly.”

Despite the admission, the IPCC reiterated its concern about the dangers melting glaciers present in a region that is home to more than one-sixth of the world’s population.

“Widespread mass losses from glaciers and reductions in snow cover over recent decades are projected to accelerate throughout the 21st century, reducing water availability, hydropower potential, and changing seasonality of flows in regions supplied by meltwater from major mountain ranges (e.g. Hindu-Kush, Himalaya, Andes)…”

“The chair, vice-chairs, and co-chairs of the IPCC,” the statement continued, “regrets the poor application of IPCC procedures…”

The apology follows a growing storm of controversy which initially forced the IPCC to concede that data relating to the Himalayan glacier melt included in the 2007 report was not backed up by sufficient scientific data.

Speaking at the World Future Energy Summit in Abu Dhabi Wednesday, the IPCC chairman, Rajendra Pachauri admitted errors had been made but said it was not an excuse to question the legitimacy of all global warming science.

“Theoretically, let’s say we slipped up on one number, I don’t think it takes anything away from the overwhelming scientific evidence of what’s happening with the climate of this earth,” he said, according to Agence France-Presse.

The controversy centers on a paragraph in Chapter 10 of the 2007 report which states: “Glaciers in the Himalaya 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. Its total area will likely shrink from the present 500,000 to 100,000 square kilometers by the year 2035. ”

But is has recently emerged that the IPCC statement on Himalayan glaciers, which was based on information from a 2005 report by the World Wildlife Fund, was in turn gleaned from an article that appeared in the popular UK science journal, The New Scientist in June 1999.

In the article, “Flooded Out,” Indian glaciologist Syed Hasnain speculates that the Himalayan glaciers could vanish within 40 years as a result of global warming.

A glacier expert interviewed by CNN explained that the data published was flawed.

Michael Zemp from the World Glacier Monitoring Service said: “There are simply no observations available to make these sorts of statements.”

Zemp says that the figures quoted in the report are not possible because 500,000 square kilometers is estimated to be the total surface area of all mountain glaciers worldwide.

“The other thing is that the report says the glaciers are receding faster than anywhere else in the world. We simply do not have the glacier change measurements. The Himalayas are among those regions with the fewest available data,” Zemp said.

In defense of the IPCC, Zemp says “you can take any report and find a mistake in it but it’s up to the next IPCC report to correct it.”

Zemp also believes that the errors shouldn’t shake people’s belief in climate science.

“Glaciers are the best proof that climate change is happening. This is happening on a global scale. They can translate very small changes in the climate into a visible signal,” he said.

Pat Buchanan Believes In Climate Change

“Not only does Hillary’s commitment represent a doubling of U.S. foreign aid, she declared at Copenhagen that climate change — known as global warming before a blizzard brought Obama winging home early — is “undeniable.”

Now, undeniably, there is climate change. But we call it spring, summer, fall and winter.”

I put this up because I think the second paragraph is brilliant. The rest of the column, which talks about how the Tea Partiers are the last best hope for the West against a “New World Order,” can be seen here.

Tom Tancredo at The George Washington University

The following was originally published by and is the sole property of NewMajority.com

Former Colorado congressman Tom Tancredo spoke Thursday night to students on the George Washington University campus at an event sponsored by the Young America?s Foundation. Tancredo played some of his oldest hits for the crowd, repeating remarks he first made about nuclear retaliation in a July 2005 radio interview. Tancredo proposed that if an Islamic terrorist attack was launched on the United States, the best policy for the U.S. would be to use nuclear weapons on Mecca and Medina, because you have ?to go for the jugular.?

?Well, what if you said something like ? if this happens in the United States, and we determine that it is the result of extremist, fundamentalist Muslims, you know, you could take out their holy sites,? Tancredo argued. The former congressman told students that mutually assured destruction was the best policy for preventing attacks from ?Islamo-Facists.? Tancredo insisted that Islamic terrorists would be greatly deterred from launching an attack on U.S. soil if they believe we are ?crazy enough? to ?take out? Mecca and Medina.

During the course of the event, New Majority also asked Tancredo his thoughts on the current state of the Republican Party. He replied, ?Bipartisanship is overrated, we don?t need moderates in the party, we need principled conservatives.?Tancredo is looking for another Reagan, ?a politician, who can inspire.? However, he does not see anyone who currently fits that mold.

During the speech, Tancredo also played a new tune for the audience, addressing fears about global warming. When asked if the G.O.P. needs to adopt a platform on climate change and current environmental issues his response was quite eloquent in its brevity: ?We have a position, its bull****.?

Tancredo?s old hits about bombing Mecca were not well received. Those statements were met with mixed reactions from the crowd. Many students? jaws dropped in amazement after he made the comments. Some looked around in awe and asked ?Is he serious?? Others defended the need for such crazed action by saying ?there is no other option.?

Distressingly though the students in attendance seemed quite happy with Tancredo?s new remarks on climate change and his statement that the GOP needs to move farther to the right, purging itself of moderates and RINOS.

Sam K. Theodosopoulos is an undergraduate at The George Washington University.