Barely recovering from Climategate, IPCC’s credibility has come under a cloud yet again in the wake of Glaciergate. After vociferously dismissing a report, two months ago, by India’s senior-most glaciologist V K Raina that questioned IPCC’s claim as voodoo science, the R K Pachauri-led panel went into damage control mode on Wednesday.
The UN panel was forced to acknowledge that it had erred on the Himalayan glaciers and not Dr Raina. Fearing that a delay would only further undermine its standing, after days of prevarication, IPCC issued a statement expressing regret. The panel acknowledged that its ‘finding’ was based on “poorly substantiated estimates of rate of recession and date for the disappearance of Himalayan glaciers.”
The fourth assessment report of IPCC had stated that the Himalayan glaciers would “disappear altogether by 2035 if not sooner.” For the UN panel, which has been scathingly dismissive of alternative views on the subject, it was an embarrassing climbdown.
Together with Climategate, it is a blow to its credibility as the reliable authority on global climate science. IPCC is the world’s premier outfit on climate change science and its assessments form the basis of government policy. The shadow of doubt cast by Climategate and Glaciergate is likely to boost the stand of climate sceptics. Given the serious nature of the climate challenge, this close succession of credibility calls could not have been more ill-timed for the panel.
That is a cause of real concern was evident from reactions by IPCC vice-chair Jean-Pascal van Ypersele. In damage control mode, Dr van Ypersele told BBC, “some people will attempt to use it to damage the credibility of IPCC; but if we can uncover it, and explain it and change it, it should strengthen IPCC’s credibility, showing that we are ready to learn from our mistakes.”
The panel bosses expressed regret about “the poor application of well-established IPCC procedures in this instance. This episode demonstrates that the quality of the assessment depends on absolute adherence to IPCC standards.”
Source : http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/Glacier-melts-credibility-of-climate-science/articleshow/5482702.cms
The UN panel was forced to acknowledge that it had erred on the Himalayan glaciers and not Dr Raina. Fearing that a delay would only further undermine its standing, after days of prevarication, IPCC issued a statement expressing regret. The panel acknowledged that its ‘finding’ was based on “poorly substantiated estimates of rate of recession and date for the disappearance of Himalayan glaciers.”
The fourth assessment report of IPCC had stated that the Himalayan glaciers would “disappear altogether by 2035 if not sooner.” For the UN panel, which has been scathingly dismissive of alternative views on the subject, it was an embarrassing climbdown.
Together with Climategate, it is a blow to its credibility as the reliable authority on global climate science. IPCC is the world’s premier outfit on climate change science and its assessments form the basis of government policy. The shadow of doubt cast by Climategate and Glaciergate is likely to boost the stand of climate sceptics. Given the serious nature of the climate challenge, this close succession of credibility calls could not have been more ill-timed for the panel.
That is a cause of real concern was evident from reactions by IPCC vice-chair Jean-Pascal van Ypersele. In damage control mode, Dr van Ypersele told BBC, “some people will attempt to use it to damage the credibility of IPCC; but if we can uncover it, and explain it and change it, it should strengthen IPCC’s credibility, showing that we are ready to learn from our mistakes.”
The panel bosses expressed regret about “the poor application of well-established IPCC procedures in this instance. This episode demonstrates that the quality of the assessment depends on absolute adherence to IPCC standards.”
Source : http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/Glacier-melts-credibility-of-climate-science/articleshow/5482702.cms
No comments:
Post a Comment