S-e-S Redux: Copenhagen?

[sumishi]

Well, there was the coldest winter in 20yrs when I was in London in '90 after 7 snowless years. Global warming does not mean there cannot be climatic variations in different parts of the world. There seems to be a spate of 'no global warming' set of articles now, no CO2 effect, no this or that -- which is complete reversal from earlier. I still dont think it computes right ...if Himalayan glaciers are receding then there is global warming. The question is how much is man-made; iirc, I had read in National geographic that in the last 150 yrs the average temperature of the globe has gone up by 1.5 degrees. Need to find that and more details on how/what is this average.

Viv, there is nothing wrong with what you are saying. But scientists proclaiming understanding of climatology is like kindergarten kids passing judgments on Relativity. It has also been reported that planetary temperatures in the solar system have been showing increase over the past several years. I will be damned if Lalu's cows' flatulence produces a temperature rise in Pluto.

What was transpiring at Copenhagen was not science but devious political gamesmanship, and targeting poor ol' CO2 as the villain of the piece to push in carbon taxes. The international "NGO" Greenpeace is involved too in presenting a slanted picture of the situation. You must be aware that the proposed cap & trade system allows polluters to pollute as long as they "purchase" or offset it with carbon credits. If you look deep enough, it is basically transfer of moneys to international bank(er)s and the newly incorporated corporations playing this game.

We have here the pollution certificate for vehicles which has to be renewed every six months. I have been doing this for the past so many years, and my vehicle's "pollution statistics" remains more or less the same. Yet I have to cough up money twice a year. This is just a simple example of a faulty implementation for "pollution correctness."

If the carbon tax system gets implemented worldwide, the cost of living goes up substantially. The electricity bills will probably more than double, the prices of almost all products go up, etc, etc. The poverty line will rise to engulf more in its fold. And where does all this money go to (equivalent of 2-3% of a country's GDP)? To the bureaucratic, un-elected, non-auditable, non-accountable WBs and IMFs.

Addendum: Note that CO2 was chosen to be vilified (over so many other toxic wastes) because it is the "pollutant" having the largest "footprint" -- almost all industrial and human processes liberate CO2 -- and so it would have had the most returns, in terms of taxes and control over industries and humans.

[putnanja]

Pressure mounts on India to formalize Copenhagen pact

The Indian government is in a fix with the key allies of US, Australia and Canada signing the Copenhagen Accord but not proffering their emission reduction targets or numbers for financial contribution to be listed in the controversial pact. With pressure to sign the deal before the end of January, the government is now left to mull if it will box itself into a corner by signing on with targets to an accord which remains legally ambiguous.

Senior officials in the PMO have advised that India should not sign on to the accord in hurry or offer its economy-wide targets under the international compact. They have also said that considering the economy-wide impact of the decision the entire cabinet could get involved, well placed sources told TOI.
...
...

[ramana]

Great going Jairam Ramesh!

[Gerard]

January 2010
World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown

November 2009
India 'arrogant' to deny global warming link to melting glaciers

[amol.p]

India Challenges Glacier-Melt Research by United Nations Experts in 2007

The Nobel prize-winning United Nations panel whose work was the benchmark for global climate negotiations is being forced to re-examine its estimate on how fast Himalayan glaciers are melting.

Research by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change suggesting Himalaya’s glaciers may disappear by 2035 needs to be investigated anew following a report in the London- based Times newspaper that flawed data may have been used, said Rajendra Pachauri, head of the award-winning scientific group.

“We are looking at the issue and will be able to comment on the report after examining the facts,” Pachauri said in a telephone interview. “We’re not changing anything till we make an assessment

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... Y7tFNVis00

[ramana]

There is something odd going on. The UN panel is headed by Dr. Pachauri and the glacier melting speculation/hypothesis was by an Indian scientist. The UN panel was awarded a Nobel prize for earlier work. Shouldn't they return it as they have been caught tampering with scientific data on this issue? What else in their data and conclusions is tailored to fit a 'point of view' of global warming?

Also is this like ball tampering in cricket?

Google Cache on UN chiefs admit mistake

However look at Dr pachauri's statement

"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

I suspect that its all cooked up evidence to support a world view.

[shravan]

However look at Dr pachauri's statement

"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

I suspect that its all cooked up evidence to support a world view.

In 2007, VK Raina, India's leading Glaciologist, who has been associated with the research and data collection in over 25 glaciers in India and abroad, debunked the theory that Gangotri glacier is retreating alarmingly.

His views were echoed by Dr RK Ganjoo, Director, Regional Centre for Field Operations and Research on Himalayan Glaciology, who is supervising study of glaciers in Ladakh region including one in the Siachen area. He also maintained that nothing abnormal has been found in any of the Himalayan glaciers studied so far by him.


---

From Economic Times Business : Glaciologist demands apology from Pachauri for 'voodoo' remark

19 Jan 2010

NEW DELHI: India's senior-most glaciologist V K Raina today said the chief of the UN climate body should apologise to the scientist fraternity for dubbing their work on melting of Himalayan glaciers as "voodoo science".

Raina's demand comes even as the UN body, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change (IPCC) headed by R K Pachauri, deliberates on retracting its statement on Himalayan glaciers melting.

"The IPCC had dumped our report that the glaciers have not retreated abnormally. Now, with the truth out in open, the IPCC should dump its own report which was based on mere speculation," Raina told PTI.

He was reacting to the revelations that the UN panel's predictions that the Himalayan glaciers will melt by 2035 stemmed from a 1999 article in a scientific journal which relied on an estimate made by a glaciologist Syed Iqbal Hasnain and not based on a peer review.

IPCC must be answerable to all the scientists and experts associated who stand vindicated that glaciers melting is not being happening at the abnormal pace as declared by it, Raina noted.

"It only shows that IPCC has based its arguments on speculations and did not verify it before making it public," the former deputy director general of the Geological Survey of India said.

Raina, in his report, had maintained that glaciers have "not shown any remarkable retreat in the last 50 years and the reports of the glaciers demise are a bit premature."

[ramana]

I expect there will be campaign to dechair the Chairman for the bogus research.

[shravan]

I expect there will be campaign to dechair the Chairman for the bogus research.

Americans knew India (scientists) did not believe in the bogus research...

[sumishi]

Finally, the mainstream media warms up (pun intended) to the anthropogenic global warming fraud.

Here's a hit piece from Lord Monckton Scientific American’s Climate Lies

A very interesting website Climategate - Anthropogenic Global Warming, history's biggest scam has been launched.

[Suraj]

I'm not in favour of Pachauri being quickly removed from his position. He serves a greater cause by remaining in his current position, as a symbol of the extent the IPCC has gone to trumpet fraudulent 'data'. Overall, Copenhagen and its aftermath have been very good for India.

[Gerard]

Pachauri: the real story behind the Glaciergate scandal

[CRamS]

Pachauri: the real story behind the Glaciergate scandal

I feel sorry for Pachuri. Like TSP, he punched above his weight and that could be his waterloo. But the larger issue is the damage this has done to this whole notion of global warming. Should republicans gain in Congress, all the wonderful efforts like renewables integration into the grid, smart grid etc will take a massive hit. But hopefully, there is enough inertia to prevent wholescale cut back.

[csharma]

Good move by India.

An ‘Indian IPCC’ on the way: Jairam

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/An--I ... ram/570786

Minister for Environment & Forests Jairam Ramesh has said he feels “vindicated” by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) goof-up on Himalayan glaciers. Talking to the The Financial Express, the minister said India would soon have a well-equipped national agency for climate change assessment, as the UN body had proven unequal to the task.

The new agency would be “an Indian IPCC”, the minister said. He added that the UN body, with its biases, seemed incapable of original and genuine research.

[CRamS]

It would be another one of those colonial tragedies of Pachuri becomes the sacrifical goat. After all, he is noting but a mouthpiece for the likes of Gore, and if at all, any heads need to roll for glaciergate and similar exaggarations, it ought to be big guns like Gore & Co.

[JE Menon]

A more than willing mouthpiece.

[Gerard]

UN climate panel blunders again over Himalayan glaciers

Glacier scientist: I knew data hadn't been verified

[csharma]

http://beta.thehindu.com/news/national/ ... epage=true

India, China won't sign Copenhagen Accord

The Indian and Chinese governments have had a rethink on signing the Copenhagen Accord, officials said on Saturday, and the UN has also indefinitely postponed its Jan 31 deadline for countries to accede to the document.

An Indian official said that though the government had been thinking of signing the accord because it “did not have any legal teeth and would be good diplomatically”; it felt irked because of repeated messages from both UN officials and developed countries to accede to it.

[pgbhat]

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

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.

In India questions are also being asked about Pachauri's links with GloriOil, a Houston, Texas-based oil technology company that specialises in recovering extra oil from declining oil fields . Pachauri is listed as a founder and scientific advisor.

[ramana]

I expect there will be campaign to dechair the Chairman for the bogus research.

"I wont go":Pachauri

Famous last words?

[shravan]

Now, 'Amazongate' has Pachauri cornered

26 Jan 2010, 1709 hrs IST

A climategate and then a glaciergate and now an Amazongate. British media reports on errors made by R K Pachauri's IPCC on the Amazon forests.

An article in Britian's daily 'Telegraph' has made another damning case against Pachauri's IPCC for the effects of climate change on the Amazon.

The report suggests the IPCC did not research the claims themselves. It says the claims were lifted off a report done by the WWF, an advocacy group. Amazongate follows an embarrassing IPCC admission of false predictions on the Himalayan Glacier meltdown.

[CRamS]

Now the campaign to oust Pachuri will assume colonial and racist tones. While the hypocrites like Gore and Clinton tarvel on private jets giving pompus speeches. There will be great "bi-partisan" dems Vs reps tamasha (or in general western right Vs left) to show how they are together in tackling climate change and sacrificing their minions like the Pachuri types will be show-cased to garner public support for this bogus colonial climate change agenda. Lesson in this for Uncle Toms willing to toe western lines.

[Gerard]

Scientists in stolen e-mail scandal hid climate data

[AnimeshP]

'Climate emails hacked by spies'

A highly sophisticated hacking operation that led to the leaking of hundreds of emails from the Climatic Research Unit in East Anglia was probably carried out by a foreign intelligence agency, according to the Government's former chief scientist. Sir David King, who was Tony Blair's chief scientific adviser for seven years until 2007, said that the hacking and selective leaking of the unit's emails, going back 13 years, bore all the hallmarks of a co-ordinated intelligence operation – especially given their release just before the Copenhagen climate conference in December.

could be our Chinese friends ... maybe that's why the West is suddenly so pissed with China these days ...

[sumishi]

'Climate emails hacked by spies' ...

Note how the enormity of the actual global warming scandal is played down and focus shifted to just hacking and internet security and how it derailed Copenhagen.

[Philip]

There is no alternative now-after the cyber-attack on the PMO too,that a national "cyber-command" is also set up along with the Nuclear command.The disruption of everyday life through cyber warfare is now a reality.Recent incidents show that several countries,foremost amongst them China,are using them to extract information and attack key institutions,civil and military.crippling the enemy's economy before launching a massive military onlaught simply adds to the confusion and paralyses defence decisionmaking.While building capability in N-weapons is a "must",the far easier route to waging war through cyber-warfare has already started.

[Gerard]

Amazongate: new evidence of the IPCC's failures

[putnanja]

When the US itself committed to 17% decrease in emissions, why did India commit to 25% reduction over 2005 limits?

[muraliravi]

When the US itself committed to 17% decrease in emissions, why did India commit to 25% reduction over 2005 limits?

India did that for 2 main reasons.

1. If we make calculations in conjunction with our projected growth rates (even if you consider lower bounds) for the next 10 years, we can afford to even cut more than 20-25%. These percentages are based on per capita inputs. So if in 2005 we have x carbon for a dollar of our GDP. In the coming years by default with better equipment and tech our emissions will not be as high per unit as before. So in that case even if we end up polluting more, the denominator ( meaning net GDP will be much higher than the rate of growth of the numerator). This is logic behind the 20-25% number. In case of the US, their growth rates are almost a third or fourth of that of India. Hence by absolute cuts their 17% cut will rank a little higher than what we would do.

2. India needs to say to the world that it is cutting down on emissions simply to sell its products in many markets who are looking for every excuse to impose carbon tax on our products (France being a good example). So whether we follow those numbers or not, that announcements helps our exports.

Hope this helps.

[amit]

When the US itself committed to 17% decrease in emissions, why did India commit to 25% reduction over 2005 limits?

India did that for 2 main reasons.

1. If we make calculations in conjunction with our projected growth rates (even if you consider lower bounds) for the next 10 years, we can afford to even cut more than 20-25%. These percentages are based on per capita inputs. So if in 2005 we have x carbon for a dollar of our GDP. In the coming years by default with better equipment and tech our emissions will not be as high per unit as before. So in that case even if we end up polluting more, the denominator ( meaning net GDP will be much higher than the rate of growth of the numerator). This is logic behind the 20-25% number. In case of the US, their growth rates are almost a third or fourth of that of India. Hence by absolute cuts their 17% cut will rank a little higher than what we would do.

2. India needs to say to the world that it is cutting down on emissions simply to sell its products in many markets who are looking for every excuse to impose carbon tax on our products (France being a good example). So whether we follow those numbers or not, that announcements helps our exports.

Hope this helps.

Boss to add to your post, over the past 10 years - a period in which we've witnessed the fastest economic growth since Independence - we've reduced emissions by the same 20-25 per cent number.

Also, it needs to be remembered that emission reduction targets are no some sort of zero sum game.

[Gerard]

IPCC imperialism on Indian glaciers

[AnimeshP]

Uh-oh ... looks like the knives are getting sharpened for Sri Pachauri
Greenpeace director tells IPCC boss Rajendra Pachauri to stand down over glacier claim

John Sauven, director of Greenpeace UK, called on the Indian academic to be replaced to rebuild the "credibility" of the UN's climate change body.

“Mistakes will always be made but it’s how you handle those mistakes which affects the credibility of the institution. Pachauri should have put his hand up and said ‘we made a mistake’," he told The Times.

Now ... I'm no fan of Mr. Pachauri but one might ask Mr John Sauven what his thoughts about Amazon-gate are ... after all it was based on Greenpeace's report that IPCC put in alarmist predictions of disappearing Amazon rain forests ... dare I say "hypocricy"

Dr North next uncovered "Amazongate". The IPCC made a prominent claim in its 2007 report, again citing the WWF as its authority, that climate change could endanger "up to 40 per cent" of the Amazon rainforest – as iconic to warmists as those Himalayan glaciers and polar bears. This WWF report, it turned out, was co-authored by Andy Rowell, an anti-smoking and food safety campaigner who has worked for WWF and Greenpeace, and contributed pieces to Britain's two most committed environmentalist newspapers. Rowell and his co-author claimed their findings were based on an article in Nature. But the focus of that piece, it emerges, was not global warming at all but the effects of logging.

A Canadian analyst has identified more than 20 passages in the IPCC's report which cite similarly non-peer-reviewed WWF or Greenpeace reports as their authority, and other researchers have been uncovering a host of similarly dubious claims and attributions all through the report. These range from groundless allegations about the increased frequency of "extreme weather events" such as hurricanes, droughts and heatwaves, to a headline claim that global warming would put billions of people at the mercy of water shortages – when the study cited as its authority indicated exactly the opposite, that rising temperatures could increase the supply of water.

source

One would hope that the fate of Mr. Pachauri would warn Indians of the dangers of carrying the water for the West but I know that this will remain a hope only ...

[Jarita]

There is an effort to privitize water in India. It will be one of the biggest mistakes we make

[negi]

Eat your dils kaffirs

PM backs Pachauri, says India has confidence in IPCC process

Backing R K Pachauri, who has come under flak for IPCC's goof up on melting of Himalayan glaciers, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on
Friday said he has earned well deserved respect and international acclaim for his contribution in meeting challenges of climate change.

India has full confidence in the IPCC process and its leadership and will support it, he said inaugurating the 10th Delhi Sustainable Development Summit, while noting that, "some aspects of the science that is reflected in the work of IPCC have faced criticism". {Mumble mumble... faced criticism for no reason ? }

"The Energy Research Insitute, TERI, has, under the able and farsighted leadership of Pachauri earned well-deserved respect and international acclaim for its contributions to the global efforts in meeting the twin challenges of energy security and climate change," {Wow PM of India vouching for a private research entity which got research grants for dubious research } he said.

Must be chanakian only.

[Sanku]

Of course Manmohan Singh would back IPCC -- the only surprise was that he took so long.

I think some jingo's had started getting too optimistic after nothing major happened after Mumbai V (of course there was a bit of S e S and a bit of accepting the intrusive inspection regime under EUMA etc but those are minor thing only)

Goooooood morning India.....

[Gerard]

India forms new climate change body

The Indian government has established its own body to monitor the effects of global warming because it “cannot rely” on the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the group headed by its own leading scientist Dr R.K Pachauri.

[Gerard]

The great global warming collapse

[sumishi]

Just like the great swine-flu hoax for profiteering purposes!!
Or the move to push GMO crops to make a killing (both literally and figuratively)!!

Rule of thumb -- do not trust ANYTHING being claimed by the West. Dig deep. Research deep. And you will always find a group of international imperial nasties and their cronies out to extinguish you finances and your life.

Of course, Indian nasties too try to do the same on the country level

[Gerard]

Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995

Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.

And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.

[Pranav]

World may not be warming, say scientists

“The temperature records cannot be relied on as indicators of global change,” said John Christy, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, a former lead author on the IPCC.