Amazongate lives - by Richard... Monday, February 01, 2010

Amazongate lives - by Richard... Monday, February 01, 2010

Despite the attempted sabotage of "Amazongate" by The Sunday Telegraph yesterday, the Daily Express does it big. The Guardian also mentions it and so does The Daily Mail. 

The Daily Telegraph, on the ball as always, lifts the story done by The Times last Saturday on "Glaciergate", disguising its source with the formulaic "it has emerged".

The Independent, meanwhile, has completely lost it, claiming that the "Climategate" e-mail "hacking" was "probably carried out by a foreign intelligence agency," citing as their "expert" source, the government's former chief scientist and surface chemist,. Sir David King.

But the paper also has Britain officially expressing its concern to the IPCC about lax scientific procedures used by the body which supplies the world with the facts about global warming. Alongside The Guardian, this paper also mentions "the destruction of the Amazon rainforest," as one of the problem areas.

Against that, I measure well over 2,000 references to "Amazongate" on the blogosphere, leaving the MSM trailing. When it comes to the heavy lifting, the MSM is making itself redundant.

CLIMATE CHANGE – FINAL PHASE THREAD

Print ready

"Profoundly irresponsible" - by Richard...

The pomposity of a second-rate politician - of whom even his best friends would admit has a brain cell count that matches the number attributed to the average IQ of a chimpanzee - telling his audience that it would be "profoundly irresponsible" to use "one mistake" as an excuse not to act on climate change, is beyond breathtaking.

But that is Ed Miliband for you, a climate change secretary who manages to display a level of arrogance on the subject which can only stem from a man possessed of an uncharted void in place of a brain. Only one so handicapped could speak in a public forum without being mortally embarrassed by his own inadequacies.

The intellectual pygmy thus speaks of "one mistake", referring to "claims that some leading scientists exaggerated the melting of the Himalayan glaciers." This, Miliband avers, does not "undermine decades of climate research"

What he ignores – or simply does not know – is that the inclusion of the claim that Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035 in the IPCC AR4 report was not a "mistake". The man who included it, professor Murari Lal, says so - stridently - so who are we to disagree with him?

Thus, while the dismal Miliband avers that "recent controversies over scientific data have not undermined efforts to tackle global warming," he glides over the essential element of the Himalayan glaciers scandal (and that it is) – that the authors of the report deliberately, with premeditation, set out to deceive, falsely to misrepresent the scale of the problem, such that it is, for wholly political reasons.

And, while a simple "mistake" could not be taken as undermining a broader thesis, evidence of structured deception is in a different league – especially the cumulative evidence from "Climategate", through "Glaciergate" to "Amazongate" and beyond. This is a powerful indicator that the whole of the IPCC AR4 is nothing but a systematic fraud.

In The Observer yesterday, however, we get the full force of Miliband's moronic tendencies, where the fool tells us: "We know there's a physical effect of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere leading to higher temperatures, that's a question of physics."

For a graduate in philosophy, politics and economics to presume to lecture us in basic physics is an arrogance beyond measure, but then to offer us a Janet and John version of the presumed behaviour of a trace gas in a complex, chaotic system that is poorly understood and even less well modelled, and to present it as the gospel truth, rises to the level of the surreal. The problem is that the man is so utterly stupid that he probably believes what he is saying – a very dangerous trait for a politician.

"We know," he bleats, that "CO2 concentrations are at their highest for 6,000 years" – a contentious statement at best. But then, he plumbs the hitherto unexplored depths of ignorance by telling us that "we know there are observed increases in temperatures." 

Clearly, this pathetic excuse for a human being simply does not have the intellect to perceive that the "temperatures" to which he refers are artifices, constructs which are calculated from adjusted raw data, of dubious provenance, subject to multiple errors, distortions and, most likely, fraud. They are no more real than was Luke Skywalker flying in his X-wing fighter into battle against the Death Star.

Not content with this, though, Miliband then struggles to a climax, managing to gather a quorum of brain cells sufficient to deliver the immortal, if risible assertion that: "we know there are observed effects that point to the existence of human-made climate change. That's what the vast majority of scientists tell us."

These "observed" effects, presumably, include the shrinking glaciers, the melting icecaps, the dying polar bears and the disappearing Amazon forests, all of which his "vast majority of scientists" are telling him are caused by climate change.

Fortunately for this creature – the thing that calls itself Miliband – its bizarre utterances were delivered at some distance from its audience. It is thus – one hopes – sublimely unaware that its sentiments cause to surface primitive urges from the depths of the subconscious, buried so deep that one is shocked to learn that they still exist.

One is hesitant to allow these "urges" full rein. Now that would be profoundly irresponsible. 

CLIMATE CHANGE – FINAL PHASE THREAD

Print ready

Indian media support eroding - by Richard... Sunday, January 31, 2010

The Liberty News Central blog highlights an article on the front page of the Hindustan Times today (click to enlarge pic). 

It is running a story on how Dr Pachauri's TERI was paid 5.6 million rupees (about £75,000) by the Indian Environment and Forest ministry to conduct IPCC meetings "to discuss the impact of climate change". Although relatively anodyne, the paper does raise the question of conflict of interest, provoking the ritual squawk of indignation from the good doctor.

"There is no conflict of interest," Pachauri says. "The first IPCC chairman, Prof Bert Bolin received substantial financial support from the government of Sweden for his functioning as chairman. The second chairman, Dr Robert Watson, was in the White House when he was elected chairman and then moved to the World Bank, where the bank not only paid his salary but also provided all support for his functioning."

Perhaps the difference is that Pachauri is head of a research institute which clearly benefits from talking up the "impact of climate change" – bidding for Indian government contracts on climate change issues - an institute which pays him an undisclosed salary, but one that is sufficient to support his extravagant lifestyle and his tenure in his £4.5 million house in Golf Links. 

These issues, however, are not raised by The Hindustan Times but, says Gurmeet of LNC, the very fact that paper is raising such issues possibly signals the end of a long love affair with the good doctor. Given that most other media are hosting critical comment, that only leaves the Delhi television station NDTV on-side. Gurmeet wonders how much longer that will last.

With perhaps unconscious irony, the Hindustan Times cites in Pachauri's defence a gentleman by the name of Pradipto Ghosh, environment secretary at the time of allocation of these funds - and now a TERI fellow. A great number of current TERI fellows are former government officials, who go on to enjoy comfortable sinecures with the organisation they were so keen to fund while in office. But, of course, there is no conflict of interest.

Ghosh, a voluble defender of the faith, says there was nothing out of place in the allocation of funds. "TERI has been receiving funds from the ministry before and after my tenure," he states, as if that somehow made it better. But then Gosh has so much in common with Pauchauri - both being keen to develop the Indian carbon market - so it would be churlish also to accuse him of conflict of interest as well.

But the fact that the Hindustan Times carried a second article critical of Pachauri suggests that there is something amiss that even the loyal Mr Ghosh can't fix.

CLIMATE CHANGE – FINAL PHASE THREAD

Print ready

He doesn't give up - by Richard...

"The science of climate change is now well established. This is the result of painstaking work of over two decades carried out by thousands of scientists drawn from across the globe to assess every aspect of climate change for the benefit of humanity. 

The Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was produced in the year 2007, and highlighted, on the basis of careful observations extending over a long period of time, that 'warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice and rising global average sea level.'"

An authored piece by R K Pachauri in The Hindu today. Given recent events, it assumes an almost comic aspect.

CLIMATE CHANGE – FINAL PHASE THREAD

Print ready

Glaciergate – still a long way from the truth - by Richard...

Evidence is building that IPCC claim that Himalayan glaciers were going to melt by 2035 was not only a deliberate fraud, but efforts were made to cover it up when the figure was challenged.

Some of the pieces of the jigsaw are already there in the public domain, starting with Ben Webster's piece inThe Times on Saturday – which we analysed in this post. This made it clear that Rajendra Pachauri was appraised of what he now claims was a "mistake" by an Indian science journalist, last November. 

But the story is taken further by Jonathan Leake in The Sunday Times today, under the heading: "Panel ignored warnings on glacier error". There, he reports that the leaders of the IPCC had known for weeks and probably months about the "error" and had even convened private conferences to discuss it. 

Although he refers to the last of such conferences, which was hosted by TERI in Delhi last month (28 December), there is no mention of the fact that this was organised by the United Nations Environment Programme, the sponsoring body for the IPCC itself.

Although it was a pre-planned meeting, it turned rapidly into a crisis "workshop" of international glaciologists, which decided that, "the IPCC conclusion that the Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035 may have to be revised ... ", adding that: "there appears to be no scientific foundation for the IPCC's prediction for the year 2035."

Although Rajedra Pachauri is not listed as an attendee, his senior glaciologist, Syed Hasnain was there, and so was professor Murari Lal, one of the lead authors of the glaciers section of the IPCC report. In all, there were fifteen TERI personnel at the workshop, including Hasnain, and TERI University is cited as a collaborator in the production of the subsequent report (cover illustrated).

Given that the meeting was actually held in the TERI offices, with so many TERI personnel there, it is inconceivable that Pachauri – director general of TERI and chairman of the IPCC – was not appraised of its findings, especially given the importance of the issue.

Apart from the implications for the IPCC, what may of course have been preoccupying Pachauri was that, on 15 January, there was to be a high-profile launch of the collaborative programme on glacier research, funded by the Carnegie Corporation, at which the president of Iceland, Dr Ólafur Grímsson, was to be the star guest.

It takes little imagination to surmise that Pachauri would not want to be embroiled in a controversy over glaciers with such a prestigious event in the offing – especially, as we see from Carnegie grant statement that the research project was based on Hasnain's false claim that glaciers "will vanish within forty years as a result of global warming … resulting in widespread water shortages."

This brings us to Hansain himself, who was leader of the TERI glaciology team. Building on our work on the timeline of Hasnain's claims, Leake makes it abundantly clear that not only were Hasnain's claims false, but he knew them to be so.

In particular, as party to the Sagamatha study which was concluded in June 2004, Hasnain had signed up to the conclusions that suggestions the region's glaciers might soon melt "would seem unfounded".

That Hansain persisted in his false claims, right up until September 2009, and then sought to defend the IPCC claim in the face of Raina's report published in November 2009, is to say the very least, perverse – more so when the leader of the Sagarmatha survey, Gwyn Rees, had re-emphasised in May 2009 that, "It is unlikely that all glaciers will vanish by 2035!"

With Hasnain by then employed by Dr Pachauri's TERI, and reliant on grant-funded work from the Carnegie Corporation and the EU "High Noon" programme – which had been initiated on the basis of Hasnain's false 2035 claim – there is a very obvious motive for Dr Hasnain to keep the controversy out of the limelight.

Thus it was that only after the falsehood had been "outed" by Leake on 17 January, that Pachauri began to acknowledge that there was a problem, but then very grudgingly. Two days after the Leake report, all he would concede was: "Theoretically, let's say we slipped up on one number ...".

With Hasnain claiming he was "misquoted" – which was never the case - and Pachauri maintaining that the inclusion of the figure was a mistake, this has all the hallmarks of a clumsy cover-up which continues to this day.

Exposing the Pachauri lie is lead author professor Murari Lal who told the UNEP workshop back in December, "that it was wrong to assume, as has been done in sections of media that the year 2035 had crept in the report by mistake" (see inset, above right).

Yet even to this day, the IPCC is still talking about an "error", thus perpetrating the lie, and concealing from the public that false information was deliberately included in the IPCC report. "Glaciergate", it seems, still has a long way to go before we get to the truth.

CLIMATE CHANGE – FINAL PHASE THREAD

Print ready

Do as I say - by Richard...

The Mail on Sunday today is doing what it does best. It picks up the "the world's most powerful climate scientist" and tells us: "Controversial climate change boss uses car AND driver to travel one mile to office... (but he says YOU should use public transport)".

Thus the piece presents Pachauri for what he really is – a rank hypocrite. "You might expect Dr Rajendra Pachauri to be doing everything he can to reduce his own carbon footprint," observes the MoS. But he shows "no apparent inclination to cut global warming in his own back yard", having his personal chauffeur collect him from his £4.5million home (pictured top) in a 1.8-litre Toyota Corolla for the one-mile journey from home to his Delhi office (pictured below right).

Under normal circumstances, the affairs of a wealthy man are his own business, but these are not "normal circumstances." This is the man who told us that the Western lifestyle isunsustainable and who constantly evangelises that we must reduce our personal consumption, while building himself a multi-million portfolio on the back of the climate change industry.

The extent of this man's hypocrisy is further brought home as the MoSdescribes how, hours later, Pachauri's chauffeur picks him up from the luxury office of his environmental "charity" (pictured below left), ignoring his institute's own literature, which gives visitors tips on how to reduce pollution by using buses. 

Such plebeian transport is not for the good doctor though. He is driven in style to an upmarket restaurant popular with expatriates and well-off tourists just half a mile from his luxurious family home.

The Pachauri family has, in fact, five cars – three for the personal used of the great doctor, including a token electric car, which is rarely used as it is not "big enough" to accommodate the great climate guru and his chauffeur.

As to his luxury home, from outward appearances it is pretty tatty, although it is fully equipped with electricity-guzzling air conditioning to keep the man cool while he saves the planet.

The Golf Links area in Central Delhi where Pachauri lives is named after the nearby Delhi Golf Course and is one of the most expensive residential areas in India. Every home in this gated community has its own security guard and it enjoys round-the-clock police patrols to protect its wealthy residents.

Dr Pachauri's neighbours include a former prime minister's son and senior Indian business leaders. Indian steel tycoon Lakshmi Mittal, Britain's richest man with an estimated £10.8 billion fortune, owns a home in the same area.

Currently, homes of a similar size to Dr Pachauri’s are being advertised at prices of around £6 million. Explaining the area's sky-high property prices, the director of an international property broker told India's Economic Times: "This area has a certain snob value attached to it. Buying a house here means announcing to the world that one has arrived in life."

So, Rajendra has "arrived in life", living high off the hog in his $1000 suits. And this is the man who lectures us about adopting more modest life-styles, adding to our bills though his incessant scare-mongering, polluting the skies as he travels hundreds of thousands of miles around the world, first class, to solicit yet more money for his institute in the name of saving the planet.

And this is the man to whom Douglas Alexander wants to give another £10 million of our money, to enable TERI "to undertake efforts by which poverty can be addressed". Well, it's certainly addressing Dr R K Pachauri's poverty.

CLIMATE CHANGE – FINAL PHASE THREAD