UN climate report riddled with errors on glaciers

UN climate report riddled with errors on glaciers

"Cogley, who wrote a letter about the problems to Science magazine that was published online Wednesday, cited these mistakes:

• The paragraph starts, "Glaciers in the Himalayas are receding faster than in any other part of the world." Cogley and Michael Zemp of the World Glacier Monitoring System said Himalayan glaciers are melting at about the same rate as other glaciers.

• It says that if the Earth continues to warm, the "likelihood of them disappearing by the 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high." Nowhere in peer-reviewed science literature is 2035 mentioned. However, there is a study from Russia that says glaciers could come close to disappearing by 2350. Probably the numbers in the date were transposed, Cogley said.

• The paragraph says: "Its total area will likely shrink from the present 500,000 to 100,000 square kilometers by the year 2035." Cogley said there are only 33,000 square kilometers of glaciers in the Himalayas.

• The entire paragraph is attributed to the World Wildlife Fund, when only one sentence came from the WWF, Cogley said. And further, the IPCC likes to brag that it is based on peer-reviewed science, not advocacy group reports. Cogley said the WWF cited the popular science press as its source.

• A table says that between 1845 and 1965, the Pindari Glacier shrank by 2,840 meters. Then comes a math mistake: It says that's a rate of 135.2 meters a year, when it really is only 23.5 meters a year. "

Scott Brown for President?

Already some pundits are mentioning Brown for President. Granted, after listening him give his acceptance speech I can see why some would pick him as a rising star. I guess in the age of Obama anything can happen. Brown would have more experience in 2012 than Obama did in 2008.

More Global Warming Deceptions

UN: Himalayan glaciers warning not backed up

"A U.N. warning that Himalayan glaciers were melting faster than any other place in the world and may be gone by 2035 was not backed up by science, U.N. climate experts said Wednesday — an admission that could energize climate change critics."

""The health of the glaciers is a cause of grave concern, but the IPCC's alarmist position that they would melt by 2035 was not based on an iota of scientific evidence," Ramesh was quoted as saying by The Times of India."

Tone Deaf Liberals

I watch MSNBC coverage of Scott Brown's win of the Massachusetts Senate election. It is amazing how their internal biases blind them to the truth.

The refuse to accept Brown came from 30 points down to winning by 5% (at the time of this writing) at the same time Obama et. al. were making back room deals on the "health care reform" bill.

Is it possible that the people feel they were fooled by Obama's promises of being "open" and "bipartisan". That instead of being a candidate of the middle that he is left of every president since, who, Wilson? (Tell me which recent President is Obama right of.) That is only right (of Carter and Clinton?) on Afghanistan.

Liberty

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure." Thomas Jefferson Paris, November 13, 1787

Will the leaders of the Democratic Party become tyrants?

Why Palin?

I have been asked why I am interested in Sarah Palin? Basically, because the left is trying to destroy her.

When McCain choose her to be V.P. my first thoughts were: McCain knows he going to lose to Obama and this was a gesture to woman. But after doing some research I thought she was better candidate than Obama. But I am a conservation on defense and finance.

The country was in a mood to get rid of Bush and Republicans. Obama ran a good primary was almost assured a victory. But McCain pick of Palin put him ahead briefly. Instead of just allowing the post convention bump to subside, the "liberal" left and media went out to try to destroy her.

After McCain mishandled the financial "crisis," he sunk in the polls and Obama won as expected.

So Palin should have retreated to obscurity, finish out a term or two in Alaska and then return to national prominence. But the left saw something they couldn't handle. A woman who walked the conservative walk. An intelligent, pretty woman who didn't have an abortion, who fought against corruption and believed in conservative values. They had to continue the verbal assaults in the national media and attacking her with ethics lawsuits. Thus making her a martyr to the conservative cause.

What impresses me most is her positive attitude. She doesn't go out to seek to destroy her adversaries, but turns lemons into lemonade by becoming a best-seller author.

I don't know if she wants to be President, but I know she will continue to be a thorn in the side to the liberal left and east-west coast elitists.

Another Hit Job on Palin on 60 minutes

Steve Schmidt and the authors of the new book, Game Change, going for another hit job on Palin. Schmidt was the one who believed Joe Liberman would be acceptable to the GOP faithful. He places everything in the most negative way. Take for example the debate prep. He says people were telling him she was overwhelmed and unprepared. But then admits she did well in the debate.

The people at CBS and Schmidt must be really afraid of Palin.

Update: The book mentions Biden also had a horrible debate prep, why didn't 60 Minutes cover that? 2/3 of program was devoted to Palin, with most of the rest devoted to Hillary. Why not cover what the book said about Reid (which other media carried)? Bill Clinton?