## Monday, January 18, 2010 ... //

### IPCC vs Pachauri: 2035 vs 2350

The Sunday Times, AFP, WUWT, and others inform that the IPCC is likely to confirm a criticism from a recent Indian government report, retract a statement that the Himalayan glaciers are likely to be gone by 2035, and disagree with a railway engineer who said that India was arrogant to doubt that the glaciers will be gone by 2035. That wouldn't be extraordinary if the railway engineer were not the IPCC boss.

The basic points about the scientific origin of the figure "2035" are now well understood. In 1999, an unknown Indian scientist listened to the song above which is an Indian variation of The 12 Days of Global Warming. He got kind of obsessed with the numbers and with the Indian culture and he calculated the date of the demise of the Himalayan glaciers. Using the song above, he got the following seemingly sensible result:

(3*(1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10+11)-3)*12+10 = 2350
This right number is easy to obtain if you listen to the song many times. So this unknown Indian scientist gave an interview to a prominent scientific journal with a highly distinguished and apolitical name, Nude Socialist, and told them that the glaciers are gone by 2350.

Now, 2350 of the best scientists in the world listened to this prophet and all of them unanimously agreed: when their colleague said 2350, it either means or is equal to 2035. If 350 is added to 2000, it's obvious that it shrinks, much like the glaciers, 90% of it melts down, and only 35 is left - as everyone but the deniers knows - which gives you 2035 in total.

With this perfect consensus, they added this revelation about the Himalayan glaciers to their holy document, the IPCC report, where it can be found even today, among hundreds of similar high-quality insights, and a blessed railway engineer made sure that this consensus was quickly shared by the remaining 6.8 billion, if not 8.6 billion, people in the world. :-)

Well, there are actually two possible sources how the number 2035 was obtained - and no one in the IPCC remembers the actual ritual that gave them the holy scripture. The Indian scientist above actually got 2035 from the song but the IPCC has taken the number from another report that had 2350 in it and they just used the poor Indian scientist to mask their 2035 vs 2350 error. At any rate, there exists no scientific source that would indicate that the glaciers will be gone by 2035 - and it's, in fact, very unlikely.

Indian railway science has already showed us its muscles. Now it's time to return to sanity and the IPCC actually has a nonzero chance to complete this difficult job, at least in this partial situation. Hundreds of similar results of the Indian railway science are still waiting to be corrected. We will see whether it will occur before 2035 or before 2350.

And that's the memo.

P.S. By the way, my report is very similar to the reports of the mainstream media. For example, the Internet edition iDNES of the top Czech newspaper, MF DNES, wrote an article called Himalayan glaciers were supposed to melt: instead, we saw a "meltdown" of the climatologists' arguments (EN). That's a pretty funny headline. It describes all this research as "totally manipulated". They also mention the recent observations of subglacial water somewhere that didn't warm up as expected.

Most commenters celebrate, praise Czech president Klaus, and predict Al Gore to be kicked into his b*lls during the next summit.

P.S. India's environment minister, Jairam Ramesh, has turned heat on Pachauri:
Due diligence had not been followed by the Nobel peace prize winning body.

The health of 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.

In fact, we had issued a report by scientist V K Raina that the glaciers have not retreated abnormally. At the time, we were dismissed, saying it was based on voodoo science. But the new report has clearly vindicated our position.
Times of India continue by explaining that it's not the first time when the IPCC was shown to be a gang of ludicrous clowns. The Hindustan Times say that the IPCC has a lot of answering to do (an interview with Ramesh). The British government has noticed the worrisome news in the press and will carry due diligence against Pachauri and his TERI.

Georg Kaser, a glaciologist in Austria and an IPCC lead author whom I have never heard of, wants to claim all the credit for having found out and pointed out that the IPCC's obviously wrong prediction was wrong - even though he is actually a part of the problem. The problem is called the IPCC.

Proselytizers in The Guardian and elsewhere claim that the error that they attribute to the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) - an eco-terror organization which is one of the true drivers of the IPCC, whose name has just come to the surface, and that has admitted that its glacier projections were bogus - doesn't change the truth about global warming. Indeed, it doesn't. It just shows that the (unchanged) truth is very different from what the IPCC, WWF, and other proselytizers have been saying for years.