UN climate chief Rajendra Pachauri "got grants through bogus claims"

-
-
- Dagum
- added this
The chairman of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), has used bogus claims that Himalayan glaciers were melting to win grants worth hundreds of thousands of pounds.
Rajendra Pachauri's Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), based in New Delhi, was awarded up to £310,000 by the Carnegie Corporation of New York and the lion's share of a £2.5m EU grant funded by European taxpayers.
It means that EU taxpayers are funding research into a scientific claim about glaciers that any ice researcher should immediately recognise as bogus. The revelation comes just a week after The Sunday Times highlighted serious scientific flaws in the IPCC's 2007 benchmark report on the likely impacts of global warming.
The IPCC had warned that climate change was likely to melt most of the Himalayan glaciers by 2035 - an idea considered ludicrous by most glaciologists. Last week a humbled IPCC retracted that claim and corrected its report.
One of them, announced earlier this month just before the scandal broke, resulted in a £310,000 grant from Carnegie.
An abstract of the grant application published on Carnegie's website said: "The Himalaya glaciers, vital to more than a dozen major rivers that sustain hundreds of millions of people in South Asia, are melting and receding at a dangerous rate.
"One authoritative study reported that most of the glaciers in the region "will vanish within forty years as a result of global warming, resulting in widespread water shortages,"
The Carnegie money was specifically given to aid research into "the potential security and humanitarian impact on the region" as the glaciers began to disappear. Pachauri has since acknowledged that this threat, if it exists, will take centuries to have any serious effect.
The money was initially given to the Global Centre, an Icelandic Foundation which then channelled it, with Carnegie's involvement, to TERI.
The cash was acknowledged by TERI in a press release, issued on January 15, just before the glacier scandal became public, in which Pachauri repeated the claims of imminent glacial melt.
It said: ""According to predictions of scientific merit they may indeed melt away in several decades."
The same release also quoted Dr Syed Hasnain, the glaciologist who, back in 1999, made the now discredited claim that Himalayan glaciers would be gone by 2035.
He now heads Pachauri's glaciology unit at TERI which sought the grants and which is carrying out the glacier research.
Critics point out that Hasnain, of all people, should have known the claim that the Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035 was bogus because he was meant to be a leading glaciologist specialising in the Himalayas.
Any suggestion that TERI has repeated an unchecked scientific claim without checking it, in order to win grants, could prove hugely embarrassing for Pachauri and the IPCC.
The second grant, from the EU, totalled £2.5m and was designed to "to assess the impact of Himalayan glaciers retreat".
It was part of the EU's HighNoon project, launched last May to fund research into how India might adapt to loss of glaciers.
In one presentation at last May's launch, Anastasios Kentarchos, of the European Commission's Climate Change and Environmental Risks Unit, specifically cited the bogus IPCC claims about glacier melt as a reason for pouring EU taxpayers' money into the project...
Rest of story at: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6999975.ece
-
- groups:
- Community, Current Tonight, Science, Progressive America, 5 more
-
- tags:
- Global Warming, Corruption, Hubris, Rajendra Pachauri, 1 more
-
-
WakeUpPeople
-
http://www.e360.yale.edu/content/digest.msp?id=2238
But Lonnie Thompson, a glaciologist from Ohio State University, told reporters that the controversy should not undermine the credibility of the IPCC report or cast doubt on the reality that the world’s glaciers are melting. From Alaska to the Alps to the Tibetan Plateau, Thompson said that 95 to 100 percent of glaciers under observance are retreating. Of the 800 glaciers in the Himalayas being monitored, 95 percent are in retreat, he said. “We’re good at what we do, but we’re still human beings, and some errors can always get through the cracks,” he said. “[But] these issues are very specific, and they do not detract from the overall findings.”
________________So, we are not to worry that the glaciers are melting, we are only to worry about an error of the rate of melting. DISTRACTION. I will not dispute that they made an error, but it is a bit presumptuous to think that they intentionally misled the EU in order to get research funds. The peer review process is meant to catch and prevent speculative information from getting into official reports, but this was a case where there was some confusion and the scientist's opinion was mistaken for formal research after reading it in a scientific magazine and a phone call interview for confirmation. Rajendra Pachauri was not a part of the peer review process for that claim. Was it a mistake?, yes. Was it an elaborate scheme to get research funds?, not necessarily - that's speculation.
- 1 year ago
-
WakeUpPeople
-
-
nursediesel
-
Who didn't know this? People know they were saying what the politicos wanted regarding climate change and were being rewarded for doing so! If any scientists submitted research and data that didn't support "global warming' they were black balled and could not receive funding grants. Shit this isn't new!
- 1 year ago
-
nursediesel