ChatterBank0 min ago
World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown
http://www.timesonlin...nt/article6991177.ece
Two years ago the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (organised by the UN) claimed that the world's glaciers were melting so fast that those in the Himalayas could vanish by 2035.
It turns out that it was based on a news story in the New Scientist published 8 years before which, in turn, was based on a short telephone interview with a little-known Indian scientist.
He has since admitted that the claim was "speculation" and was not supported by any formal research.
Also it turns out that Al Gore "misspoke" when he claimed that the North Pole would be ice-free within five to seven years http://www.timesonlin...en/article6959509.ece i.e. he selectively used information.
2 stories from just today which show that these "we're doomed" claims resulting from dogma or funding to support the populist line are unravelling as they turn out to be either unreasonable interpolation or ignoring that data which disagrees with the cause.
Two years ago the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (organised by the UN) claimed that the world's glaciers were melting so fast that those in the Himalayas could vanish by 2035.
It turns out that it was based on a news story in the New Scientist published 8 years before which, in turn, was based on a short telephone interview with a little-known Indian scientist.
He has since admitted that the claim was "speculation" and was not supported by any formal research.
Also it turns out that Al Gore "misspoke" when he claimed that the North Pole would be ice-free within five to seven years http://www.timesonlin...en/article6959509.ece i.e. he selectively used information.
2 stories from just today which show that these "we're doomed" claims resulting from dogma or funding to support the populist line are unravelling as they turn out to be either unreasonable interpolation or ignoring that data which disagrees with the cause.
Answers
1 to 4 of 4
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Jumbuck. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Jumbuck you are also guessing that the rise in greenhouse gas will not cause change. The vast weight of evidence support climate change as a fact.
Choosing a few unreliable bits and pieces does not disproved the underlying theory. The two stories do not show the claims result from dogma. Dogma is what is coming from those who refuse to see the wealth of evidence supporting the therory. Most of them are utterly clueless at basic science yet insist they know the truth.
The Arctic ice continues to shrink at the rate of thousands of square kilometres per year.
Choosing a few unreliable bits and pieces does not disproved the underlying theory. The two stories do not show the claims result from dogma. Dogma is what is coming from those who refuse to see the wealth of evidence supporting the therory. Most of them are utterly clueless at basic science yet insist they know the truth.
The Arctic ice continues to shrink at the rate of thousands of square kilometres per year.
Well... I don't imagine the polar bears are facing impending doom, and I daresay it's all been blown out of proportion. However, we should never become complacent about climate change and global warming. I will just carry on as I always have done. I.e. Recycle everything I possibly can and only take the car out when I can't walk.
But I'm certainly not about to embrace veganism.
But I'm certainly not about to embrace veganism.
1 to 4 of 4
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.