# India abandons IPCC **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 6, 2010, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/india-abandons-ipcc/527874 "2010-02-06T02:00:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/india-abandons-ipcc/527874/41 "2010-02-08T00:22:08Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > First, there was Climategate, and now this, following close on the heels of Climategate, which happened just before this happened. And, then, of course, there was Climategate… Man, they just keep piling up, don’t they? Have you heard about lycopene yet? Emerging science says it may be good for your eyes. What’s more, it’s been saying that for _ten years_! Heck it’s taking so long to come out that they’ve cancelled the trademark: > [@](#): > > Word Mark EMERGING SCIENCE > Goods and Services (CANCELLED) IC 005. US 006 018 044 046 051 052. G & S: vitamin and mineral supplements. FIRST USE: 19970220. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19970220 > Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING > Serial Number 75189152 > Filing Date October 17, 1996 > Current Filing Basis 1A > Original Filing Basis 1B > Published for Opposition July 15, 1997 > Registration Number 2217677 > Registration Date January 12, 1999 > Owner (REGISTRANT) Eckerd Corporation CORPORATION DELAWARE 8333 Bryan Dairy Road Largo FLORIDA 34647 > > (LAST LISTED OWNER) EDC LICENSING INC. CORPORATION DELAWARE 300 DELAWARE AVENUE WILMINGTON DELAWARE 19801 > Assignment Recorded ASSIGNMENT RECORDED > Attorney of Record WILLIAM W BECKETT > Type of Mark TRADEMARK > Register PRINCIPAL > Live/Dead Indicator DEAD > Cancellation Date October 15, 2005 > **[United States Patent and Trademark Office](https://www.uspto.gov/)** > > Home page of the United States Patent and Trademark Office's main web site. This could be the smoking gun, the precursor to your unending stream of climategate scandals! ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/india-abandons-ipcc/527874/42 "2010-02-08T00:57:52Z")
The Yale forum on Climate Change and the media took a look: [http://www.yaleclimatemediaforum.org/2010/02/anatomy-of-ipccs-himalayan-glacier-year-2035-mess/](http://www.yaleclimatemediaforum.org/2010/02/anatomy-of-ipccs-himalayan-glacier-year-2035-mess/) > [@](#): > > Some see this episode as an example of science righting itself through its ongoing self-correcting process. In that case, the events surrounding the Himalayan-glaciers-gone-by-2035 fiasco might in the end prove to be a worthwhile learning experience, something from which positives - and not just negatives - can be gleaned. > > When, after all, is the last time you heard of the most determined contrarians publicly rethinking and correcting their positions? > > That said, timing is everything. In basketball, ballet, music, politics, and climate science. And the timing in this case could hardly have been worse. > > The appropriate, understandable, and necessary brouhaha over **the IPCC’s handling of the melting Himalayan glaciers conclusion comes in the wake of the comparatively far less serious (in terms of impact on actual climate science, if not popular perceptions) hacked e-mails fiasco.** And of the disappointments with the Copenhagen climate summit. And of the shrinking prospects for significant legislative action on climate change from a weakened congressional leadership still reeling from the loss of its “veto-proof” 60-vote majority, a testy electorate, and nagging economic and unemployment woes. > > But all these eventually can and do have a cumulative impact, certainly on the public perception of things, and therefore also on political and policy responses. > > It’s just what any serious doctor would not prescribe, just when an already ailing political process needed it least. > > How the climate science community - IPCC and the thousands of scientists on whose shoulders its work depends - responds is critical. First, we must fully understand exactly how and why the mistakes about the Himalayan glaciers occurred, keeping in mind that there is still no doubt that the world’s glaciers indeed are at heightened risk in our warming world. > > Bidisha Banerjee’s and George Collins’s comprehensive analysis helps to answer the important “How did this happen?” question. > > The next question involves how IPCC addresses flaws in its procedures to prevent recurrence of such a mistake. In doing so, it can maintain its standing as the science community’s, and indeed the world’s, most authoritative voice on climate change. > > The world is watching. IPCC must act quickly to repair the damage and return the world’s attention and focus to the real story – the causes and consequences of, and potential solutions for, anthropogenic climate change. > > The world’s glaciers, after all, aren’t sitting by idly waiting. For them, the clock is ticking. That, and other conclusions by climate researchers posted \*\*before \*\*shows me that the conclusion from that Globe and Mail opinion that “many climate scientists now sense a sinking ship, and they’re bailing out.” is pure BS. And the bolded part shows what happened in the end with the pumped up Climategate. I predicted that a log time ago, science was not affected by the lies and innuendo by the denial media regarding the the cherry picked stolen e-mails. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/india-abandons-ipcc/527874/43 "2010-02-08T01:00:46Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Do you have a cite for that? What do you think is the point when the current CO2 levels in the atmosphere have been shown to raise the temperature? If a warehouse full of food catches fire is the solution to stop making food? No, you throw $10 worth of water on it. the correct solution to global warming is to spend money in the most efficient way on methods that lower atmospheric temperature. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/india-abandons-ipcc/527874/44 "2010-02-08T01:07:27Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > If a warehouse full of food catches fire is the solution to stop making food? No, you throw $10 worth of water on it. the correct solution to global warming is to spend money in the most efficient way on methods that lower atmospheric temperature. Ah ha, I was not 100% sure what solution you were referring to, that is Geo-engineering. (It is a very silly example that of the warehouse BTW.) > **[RealClimate: Why Levitt and Dubner like geo-engineering and why they are wrong](https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/10/why-levitt-and-dubner-like-geo-engineering-and-why-they-are-wrong/)** > > RealClimate: A review of the science of geoengineering featured in Superfreakonomics by Levitt and Dubner > [@](#): > > Is geo-engineering a fix? > > In a word, no. To be fair, if the planet was a single column with completely homogeneous properties from the surface to the top of the atmosphere and the only free variable was the surface temperature, it would be fine. Unfortunately, the real world (still) has an ozone layer, winds that depend on temperature gradients that cause European winters to warm after volcanic eruptions, rainfall that depends on the solar heating at the surface of the ocean and decreases dramatically after eruptions, clouds that depend on the presence of condensation nuclei, plants that have specific preferences for direct or diffuse light, and marine life that relies on the fact that the ocean doesn’t dissolve calcium carbonate near the surface. > > The point is that a planet with increased CO2 and ever-increasing levels of sulphates in the stratosphere is not going to be the same as one without either. The problem is that we don’t know more than roughly what such a planet would be like. The issues I listed above are the ‘known unknowns’ – things we know that we don’t know (to quote a recent US defense secretary). These are issues that have been raised in existing (very preliminary) simulations. There would almost certainly be ‘unknown unknowns’ – things we don’t yet know that we don’t know. A great example of that was the creation of the Antarctic polar ozone hole as a function of the increased amount of CFCs which was not predicted by any model beforehand because the chemistry involved (heterogeneous reactions on the surface of polar stratospheric cloud particles) hadn’t been thought about. There will very likely be ‘unknown unknowns’ to come under a standard business as usual scenario as well – another reason to avoid that too. > > **There is one further contradiction in the idea that geo-engineering is a fix. In order to proceed with such an intervention one would clearly need to rely absolutely on climate model simulations and have enormous confidence that they were correct (otherwise the danger of over-compensation is very real even if you decided to start off small).** As with early attempts to steer hurricanes, the moment the planet did something unexpected, it is very likely the whole thing would be called off. It is precisely because climate modellers understand that climate models do not provide precise predictions that they have argued for a reduction in the forces driving climate change. The existence of a near-perfect climate model is therefore a sine qua non for responsible geo-engineering, but should such a model exist, it would likely alleviate the need for geo-engineering in the first place since we would know exactly what to prepare for and how to prevent it. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/india-abandons-ipcc/527874/45 "2010-02-08T01:40:16Z")
I used the warehouse example because Co2 is food for most of the planet’s life forms. What is silly is the notion that the United States and assorted European nations will spend trillions of dollars on alternative energy while billions of people in India and China cook their meals over an open fire. I’ll give you a simple of example of how to waste money. We use to have E-checks in Ohio to the tune of $10 a year for each car. Since virtually all the cars checked have computers adjusting the fuel mixture many times a second it was a complete waste of money. We could have purchased Co2 Scrubbers for older power plants with the money or at least gotten hookers on our birthday. But no. Millions of dollars were pissed away until they finally stopped the program. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/india-abandons-ipcc/527874/46 "2010-02-08T02:01:06Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > I used the warehouse example because Co2 is food for most of the planet’s life forms. No, the silliness in the realization that a burning warehouse example has only one analogue in the current climate discussions: that of worse case scenario were we are turning into Venus, indeed, too late to do anything. That worse case BTW is something that very few researchers propose as likely. Also no one is denying that regarding CO2, the problem is that the quantities of CO2 sent to the atmosphere by human activities are overtaking the previously balanced natural CO2 cycle. > **[Is CO2 a pollutant?](https://skepticalscience.com/co2-pollutant.htm)** > > \While there are direct ways in which CO2 is a pollutant (acidification of the ocean), its primary impact is its greenhouse warming effect. While the greenhouse effect is a natural occurence, too much warming has severe negative impacts on... > [@](#): > > What the science says… > > While there are ways in which CO2 is a pollutant (acidification of the ocean), it’s primary impact is its greenhouse warming effect. While the greenhouse effect is a natural occurance, too much warming has severe negative impacts on agriculture, health and environment. > [@Magiver](#): > > What is silly is the notion that the United States and assorted European nations will spend trillions of dollars on alternative energy while billions of people in India and China cook their meals over an open fire. Oh really? [http://climateprogress.org/2010/01/31/lindsey-graham-price-for-carbon-china-dominate-the-green-economy-clean-energy-jobs/](http://climateprogress.org/2010/01/31/lindsey-graham-price-for-carbon-china-dominate-the-green-economy-clean-energy-jobs/) > [@](#): > > Lindsey Graham: “Every day that we delay trying to find a price for carbon is a day that China uses to dominate the green economy.” > With 20 million jobs at stake globally, China poured $440 billion into clean energy last year. Our only hope to match them is the bipartisan climate and clean energy jobs bill > January 31, 2010 > > ``` > It is shaping up to be the Great Game of the 21st century. To top officials and business executives here at the World Economic Forum, Topic A this year was the race to develop greener, cleaner technology…. it is a battle for potentially millions of jobs and trillions of dollars in export revenues. > > “Six months ago my biggest worry was that an emissions deal would make American business less competitive compared to China,” said Senator Lindsay Graham, a Republican from South Carolina who has been deeply involved in climate change issues in Congress. “Now my concern is that every day that we delay trying to find a price for carbon is a day that China uses to dominate the green economy.” > > He added: “China has made a long-term strategic decision and they are going gang-busters.” > > ``` I should not forget to mention that Lindsey Graham is a Republican and a conservative. > [@Magiver](#): > > I’ll give you a simple of example of how to waste money. We use to have E-checks in Ohio to the tune of $10 a year for each car. Since virtually all the cars checked have computers adjusting the fuel mixture many times a second it was a complete waste of money. We could have purchased Co2 Scrubbers for older power plants with the money or at least gotten hookers on our birthday. But no. Millions of dollars were pissed away until they finally stopped the program. Here in arizona there is a different test for computerized engines and in Ohio the program has been modified, in any case I never said I was in favor of what you are mentioning. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/india-abandons-ipcc/527874/47 "2010-02-08T02:10:18Z")
China doesn’t care about Global Warming. They’re building coal fired plants at a tremendous rate. Look at the pollution problems they had with the last Olympics. They’re making money off of Global Warming like a $cientologist. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/india-abandons-ipcc/527874/48 "2010-02-08T02:27:58Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > China doesn’t care about Global Warming. They’re building coal fired plants at a tremendous rate. Look at the pollution problems they had with the last Olympics. They’re making money off of Global Warming like a $cientologist. That is not what you said anyhow, what is clear that you are wrong in all your points so far. And I care more about what Chinese scientists say, the government may say otherwise but I have seen that Chinese researchers are not so skeptical as many denier sources imply. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/india-abandons-ipcc/527874/49 "2010-02-08T02:34:19Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > That is not what you said anyhow, what is clear that you are wrong in all your points so far. What is clear is that you don’t understand my point and live in a fantasy world. Co2 reduction is not a solution in the real world because nobody is going to follow it. > [@GIGObuster](#): > > And I care more about what Chinese scientists say, the government may say otherwise but I have seen Chinese researchers are not so skeptical as many denier sources imply. All I care about is spending money effectively to solve a problem. If Arizona is taking your money for E-checks and you think this is making 1/1,000,000,000,000,000 th of a difference then you are a person whose money is easily parted. I’ll light a candle in honor of your faith. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/india-abandons-ipcc/527874/50 "2010-02-08T02:43:01Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > What is clear is that you don’t understand my point and live in a fantasy world. Co2 reduction is not a solution in the real world because nobody is going to follow it. You are still wrong in what you are saying. Right now you have a point, and I already have mentioned this before: I do not trust that politicians will do much right now, but as science progress and evidence piles up, politicians will be idiots if they do not act then. > [@Magiver](#): > > All I care about is spending money effectively to solve a problem. If Arizona is taking your money for E-checks and you think this is making 1/1,000,000,000,000,000 th of a difference then you are a person whose money is easily parted. I’ll light a candle in honor of your faith. Another silly example, the solution for this issue will require many different approaches. Just one example will not do. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/india-abandons-ipcc/527874/51 "2010-02-08T02:54:43Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > If a warehouse full of food catches fire is the solution to stop making food? No, you throw $10 worth of water on it. the correct solution to global warming is to spend money in the most efficient way on methods that lower atmospheric temperature. [Comet ice!](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimes_of_the_Hot)🙂 ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/india-abandons-ipcc/527874/52 "2010-02-08T03:00:24Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > [Comet ice!](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimes_of_the_Hot)🙂 One of favorite episodes: [QUOTE=Futurama] **Documentary Narrator** : Fortunately, our handsomest politicians came up with a cheap, **last minute** way to combat global warming. Ever since 2063, we simply drop a giant ice cube into the ocean now and again. **Suzie** : Just like daddy puts in his drink every morning. Then he gets mad. **Documentary Narrator** : Of course, because the greenhouse gasses are still building up, it takes more and more ice each time, thus solving the problem once and for all. **Suzie** : But… **Documentary Narrator** : **Once and for all!!** [/QUOTE] ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 3:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/india-abandons-ipcc/527874/53 "2010-02-08T03:02:26Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Right now you have a point, and I already have mentioned this before: I do not trust that politicians will do much right now, but as science progress and evidence piles up, politicians will be idiots if they do not act then. I can agree with that. > [@GIGObuster](#): > > the solution for this issue will require many different approaches. Just one example will not do. No argument there. We can reduce co2 from cars by 2/3 and coal fired plants by 1/2 if we perfect algae based bio-diesel. It’s a one-shot change that utilizes current automotive technology and energy distribution nodes. We could be driving [Ford’s 65 mpg diesel](http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_37/b4099060491065.htm?chan=autos_autos+--+lifestyle+subindex+page_top+stories)right now in the United States. It would be my next car purchase. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/india-abandons-ipcc/527874/54 "2010-02-08T03:30:35Z")
As for evidence “piling up”: [http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/pressoffice/2009/pr20091208b.html](http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/pressoffice/2009/pr20091208b.html) > [@](#): > > The first decade of this century has been, by far, the warmest decade on the instrumental record. > > New figures released today in Copenhagen show that — despite 1998 being the warmest individual year — the last ten years have clearly been the warmest period in the 160-year record of global surface temperature, maintained jointly by the Met Office Hadley Centre and the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia. > > Similar results are revealed in the independent analyses made by the United State National Climatic Data Center and NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies. > > These figures highlight that the world continues to see global temperature rise, most of which is due to increasing emissions of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, and clearly shows that the argument that global warming has stopped is flawed. ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 4:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/india-abandons-ipcc/527874/55 "2010-02-08T04:30:12Z")
I’m delighted to see independent reviews of the IPCC conclusions. There is no chance we average individuals can possibly come to reasonable conclusions; it’s too complex a subject with way too many political and financial overtones, not to mention the stakes of all the various parties. As I’ve mentioned elsewhere many times, I find no behavioural differences between AGW alarmists and extremists proselytizing for any other religion, and that behaviour alone increases my personal skepticism. I expect to see a great many more independent reviews led by increasingly robust and formidable opponents, and I welcome it. I find the pro-AGW position very annoying that the science is settled, opposing skeptics are ignoramuses and the current research is unbiased. Were I Don Quixote, my current windmill would be the cap and trade farce, with particular reference to the validation of carbon “offset” credits and the fortunes made in a shady market dealing in a sham commodity overseen by the naive, the greedy and the shysters. See, for instance, Terry Gross’s interview with Mark Schapiro on NPR: [Cap And Trade And The New Carbon Economy : NPR](http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=123037162) ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 4:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/india-abandons-ipcc/527874/56 "2010-02-08T04:36:13Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > I’m delighted to see independent reviews of the IPCC conclusions. There is no chance we average individuals can possibly come to reasonable conclusions; it’s too complex a subject with way too many political and financial overtones, not to mention the stakes of all the various parties. As I’ve mentioned elsewhere many times, I find no behavioural differences between AGW alarmists and extremists proselytizing for any other religion, and that behaviour alone increases my personal skepticism. And as it was pointed many times before, it is a funny religion that even “converts” most of the scientists that are in the energy industry. Repeating the canard that it is a religion is in reality the best way to discredit anyone that calls himself an skeptic. Regarding the “robust independent review”: as the former climate modeler at Stoat reported: [http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2010/02/indians\_go\_wacko.php](http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2010/02/indians_go_wacko.php) > [@](#): > > He [the environmental minister] also, said (in essence disowning his earlier report, so clearly someone has stomped on him. But there is some bizarre revisionism elsewhere, with him saying “My ministry brought out a discussion paper on glaciers after it was found that major divergence of views existed between Indian scientists and the IPCC,”): > > > [@](#): > > > > ``` > > The UN panel's claims of glacial meltdown by 2035 "was clearly out of place and didn't have any scientific basis," he said, while stressing the government remained concerned about the health of the Himalayan ice flows. "Most glaciers are melting, they are retreating, some glaciers, like the Siachen glacier, are advancing. But overall one can say incontrovertibly that the debris on our glaciers is very high the snow balance is very low. We have to be very cautious because of the water security particularly in north India which depends on the health of the Himalayan glaciers," he added. > > > > ``` > > This is just politicking, and while it makes for some fun snarking there is precious little substance here. Someone will get a nice little empire out of managing the thing, and someone will have to produce some kind of output to stop the minister looking too stupid, but there will be nothing valuable produced by this project. I notice they say: The body, which he said will not rival the UN’s panel, will publish its own climate assessment in November this year. So (in the current absence of a sea ice bet) anyone care to put an anything on this? I take the side of: the report will be delayed, or if it appears on time will be an obviously valueless and hastily-cobbled together. > > Any takers for the “it will be on time and clearly valuable” side? > > ps: the actual setup seems to be at [http://moef.nic.in/modules/others/?f=event](http://moef.nic.in/modules/others/?f=event), if you care. > > pps: rather oddly, [http://moef.nic.in/downloads/others/Final\_Book.pdf](http://moef.nic.in/downloads/others/Final_Book.pdf) says the thing was launched in 7/10/09. Did everyone just quietly ignore it for months? ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 6:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/india-abandons-ipcc/527874/57 "2010-02-08T06:12:19Z")
[Think-tanks take oil money and use it to fund climate deniers | The Independent | The Independent](http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/thinktanks-take-oil-money-and-use-it-to-fund-climate-deniers-1891747.html) In England the polling says doubters of global warming have gone from 15 percent to about 25. It goes along with Exxon paying a lot of money to global warming deniers and providing them with forums. If you spend enough money you can convince the people of damn near anything. I suppose there are still people who think smoking does not cause cancer. In the US with the Supreme Court opening up the floodgates of corporate money, you can be sure they will inform the populace of the TRUTH. The one that makes more money for them. It is sad times ahead . ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 6:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/india-abandons-ipcc/527874/58 "2010-02-08T06:59:34Z")
As opposed to the media blitz we’ve been having for the past 4-5 years from Global Warming chicken little types? You can’t swing a dead cat without hitting programming on cable or satellite that mentions Global Warming, and usually mentions it in ways that paint a grim and dire picture. Hell, I was watching something on the Military Channel and they mentioned Global Warming for the gods sake! I seriously doubt that any amount of money that Exxon spends is going to seriously dent the public’s perceptions about Global Warming at this point. The only thing that will do that is if new data comes out that contradicts the Global Warming hypothesis…and even then I think it will take a long time to do. That said, I think there will be a bit of push back from the public due to how over the top the media blitz has been (at least here in the US) from the more fervent (and over the top) pro-GW folks. I think that, as with the anti-nuclear movement here in the US that eventually you get to the saturation level, where you have bombarded the public with so many dire warnings and over the top The World is ENDDDDIIINNNNGG! type predictions that you get a lot of the public going ‘meh’ or pushing back and becoming knee jerk skeptics. And, of course, scandals catch headlines. Whether justified or not, I think that the pro-GW crowd (distinguished, IMHO, from the scientists and serious climate researchers and related scientists who are actually out doing the work, and who, by and large are NOT making all the dire predictions) has over played it’s hand, and now they are getting a bit of backlash from the public over some of these scandals and revelations. Personally, as with the more ridiculous claims by the pro-GW crowd concerning how the world is ending soon, I think that a lot of these scandals are vastly overblown. That said, though, I think that the pro-GW faithful have hurt the serious scientists by saturating the air waves with their non-scientific drivel, especially in light of the public’s reaction to things like that mentioned in the OP. To me, it’s kind of ironic, in a sad sort of way, that the public can be influenced first by the dire warnings and predictions bombarding them from every direction about GW, and are now being influenced in the opposite way by equally dire reports about the supposed conspiracy concerning manipulating the public about GW. -XT ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 7:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/india-abandons-ipcc/527874/59 "2010-02-08T07:18:38Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > That said, though, I think that the pro-GW faithful have hurt the serious scientists by saturating the air waves with their non-scientific drivel, especially in light of the public’s reaction to things like that mentioned in the OP. Yes, but even evolution had their scandals, it did not change the science, and this is where I also disagree with \*\*Gonzo \*\*here, it is the denier media that are in reality overplaying their hand. And even science reporters, are beginning to lose patience with the howlers the denier media is tossing. One favorite of mine was posted in a previous thread, he had also criticized Al Gore for falling for exaggerations, however the CRU hack showed to reporters like him how the deniers had fallen for conspiracy theories. [![](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/7nnVQ2fROOg/hqdefault.jpg "6. Climate Change -- Those hacked e-mails") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nnVQ2fROOg) If there is a pattern it is that deniers are the ones that are marginalizing themselves where in the end it counts: in the scientific areas, research and academia. > [@xtisme](#): > > To me, it’s kind of ironic, in a sad sort of way, that the public can be influenced first by the dire warnings and predictions bombarding them from every direction about GW, and are now being influenced in the opposite way by equally dire reports about the supposed conspiracy concerning manipulating the public about GW. > > -XT It is sad, but as I take the history of evolutionary science into account, it is not hopeless. In any case, not all sources or media resort to the mendacity noticed in citations like the one in the OP. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 7:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/india-abandons-ipcc/527874/60 "2010-02-08T07:46:48Z")
There was another thought that you made me realize **xtisme**. It is that there is another pattern that the climate truthers and anti-evolutionists will share. Among anti-evolutionists, no matter how many decades or even centuries will pass, scandals like the Nebraska man and Piltdown man are still mentioned. Like-wise, as I see in this thread, climate truthers will always repeat items like the CRU hack and errors in the IPCC reports. It will never matter that investigations continue to make clear how unreliable are the so called skeptics of the climate science. [http://climateprogress.org/2010/02/04/penn-state-michael-mann-hockey-stick-science/](http://climateprogress.org/2010/02/04/penn-state-michael-mann-hockey-stick-science/) > [@](#): > > ``` > An academic inquiry into the so-called “climategate” email scandal has concluded that a well-known U.S. scientist did not directly or indirectly falsify data in his research. > > The review, by a panel of senior administrators at Pennsylvania State University, found no evidence that climatologist Michael Mann had manipulated research that indicates humans are causing global warming. > > ``` > > This finding is a big setback for the anti-science crowd, who have been going after Mann full throttle, trying to find imaginary whistleblowers to accuse him and others at Penn State of fraud (see “Anti-science disinformers step up efforts to intimidate and harass climate scientists.” > > The anti-scientists hate Mann, one of the country’s leading climatologists, for his role in creating the Hockey Stick graph, which they still maintain is fraudulent, when in fact it was essentially vindicated in a thorough examination by a panel of the National Academy of Sciences (see NAS Report and here). > > Even more important than the fact that the original analysis was defensibly correct, is that the conclusions were correct [which could be true even if the analysis had flaws in it]. Is the planet now as hot (or hotter) than it has been in a millenium? Try two millennia — see “Sorry deniers, hockey stick gets longer, stronger: Earth hotter now than in past 2,000 years,“ which discusses the PNAS study that is the source of the above graph. > > Note that the myth pushed by the anti-science disinformers — that somehow the recent warming is merely a rebound from the so-called “little ice age” — has no basis in the data. We have blown past the temperatures of the past two millenia. That’s why climatologist and one-time darling of the contrarians Ken Caldeira said last year, “To talk about global cooling at the end of the hottest decade the planet has experienced in many thousands of years is ridiculous.” However, if evidence is on your side, there is very little to fear from the FUD proponents. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/india-abandons-ipcc/527874.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/india-abandons-ipcc/527874.md?page=4)