2035 or 2350, who cares?

But for the fact that they want to loot trillions in the name of climate change(and make themselves millions in the process), this bunch of baboons are turning the whole field of climate 'science' into a farce. Facts, shmacts -who cares? 2035 or 2350, how does it matter,as long as the media poodles keep hiding the ball and stick to the narrative?

 BBC reports-

The UN panel on climate change warning that Himalayan glaciers could melt to a fifth of current levels by 2035 is wildly inaccurate, an academic says.

J Graham Cogley, a professor at Ontario Trent University, says he believes the UN authors got the date from an earlier report wrong by more than 300 years.

He is astonished they "misread 2350 as 2035". The authors deny the claims.

Leading glaciologists say the report has caused confusion and "a catalogue of errors in Himalayan glaciology".

-----------------------------------

In its 2007 report, the Nobel Prize-winning Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said: "Glaciers in the Himalayas are receding faster than in any other part of the world and, if the present rate continues, the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high if the Earth keeps warming at the current rate.


"It is not plausible that Himalayan glaciers are disappearing completely within the next few decades"
Michael Zemp,
World Glacier Monitoring Service

--------------------------------------

"Its total area will likely shrink from the present 500,000 to 100,000 square kilometres by the year 2035," the report said.

----------------------------------------But Professor Cogley has found a 1996 document by a leading hydrologist, VM Kotlyakov, that mentions 2350 as the year by which there will be massive and precipitate melting of glaciers.

"The extrapolar glaciation of the Earth will be decaying at rapid, catastrophic rates - its total area will shrink from 500,000 to 100,000 square kilometres by the year 2350," Mr Kotlyakov's report said.

Mr Cogley says it is astonishing that none of the 10 authors of the 2007 IPCC report could spot the error and "misread 2350 as 2035".

"I do suggest that the glaciological community might consider advising the IPCC about ways to avoid such egregious errors as the 2035 versus 2350 confusion in the future," says Mr Cogley.

------------------------------------
When asked how this "error" could have happened, RK Pachauri, the Indian scientist who heads the IPCC, said: "I don't have anything to add on glaciers."

The IPCC relied on three documents to arrive at 2035 as the "outer year" for shrinkage of glaciers.

They are: a 2005 World Wide Fund for Nature report on glaciers; a 1996 Unesco document on hydrology; and a 1999 news report in New Scientist.

Incidentally, none of these documents have been reviewed by peer professionals, which is what the IPCC is mandated to be doing.

Murari Lal, a climate expert who was one of the leading authors of the 2007 IPCC report, denied it had its facts wrong about melting Himalayan glaciers.

But he admitted the report relied on non-peer reviewed - or 'unpublished' - documents when assessing the status of the glaciers.

There's more.

But this is amazing -not only did the l'affaire climategate show the the peer-review process has been corrupted, but now we know that such deafening scaremongering is also based on non-peer reviewed studies.Who could have thunk that?

Also read Dr. Madhav Khandekar's take on the Himalayan glaciers.

Can we just call the whole nightmare joke off?