This is the kind of huge headline story you would expect to see splashed across the pages of the WWF website, Nature magazine and a Louise Gray article in the Telegraph. We keep reading how various species are clinging precariously to existence and that any further small change in their environment caused by gaseous emissions will finally do for them and tip them over the edge into extinction. I doubt that many climate campaigners ever thought they would see the Bearded Pachauri added to the endangered list, but that is what has happened. As we are learning:
…The Pachauri habitat deep in the IPCC is quickly being transformed and climate change is at the root of it. Observers are discovering that the IPCC is unable to support the survival of this bearded curiosity much longer. Despite regular well funded migrations to a variety of luxurious board rooms and conference halls around the world, and the donation of huge sums in grants and award of directorships, the delicate balance between error and fraud in the IPCC habitat of the Bearded Pachauri has been disturbed by a huge increase in emissions of deceitful hot air. The sheer concentration of this man made gas is considered responsible for dramatically changing the conditions in the Pachauri’s environment and doing so with far greater speed that any scientist had previously projected. A spokesman for the WWF told us that the loss of the Pachauri is almost certainly unavoidable: ‘Man is responsible for this. We should have dramatically reduced our emissions of deceitful hot air. Producers of lie gas, such as Gore Inc and GISS Corp should have curbed their emissions but they failed to do so and now the IPCC is incapable of supporting the Bearded Pachauri. It will be a defining loss…’
The problem for Rajendra Pachauri is that he compounds his lies because he is so caught up in a web of deceit. As The Times explains today, when Pachauri was asked whether he had deliberately kept silent about the Himalayan glacier error to avoid embarrassment at the Copenhagen conferfence, he said:
“That’s ridiculous. It never came to my attention before the Copenhagen summit. It wasn’t in the public sphere.”
However The Times has identified a journalist who said that he had asked Dr Pachauri about the 2035 error last November. Pallava Bagla, who writes for Science journal – and as EU Referendum points out ironically works for Pachauri’s chief media cheerleader NDTV – , said he had asked Dr Pachauri about the error. He said that Dr Pachauri had replied: “I don’t have anything to add on glaciers.” This is probably because Pachauri had previously dismissed a report by the Indian Government which said that glaciers might not be melting as much as had been feared. He described the report, which did not mention the 2035 error, as ‘voodoo science’. There is more of the exchange between Pachauri and Bagla reported in the Mail today.
The chickens are coming home to roost. Pachauri’s position is untenable. The IPCC is a discredited shambles. But even when Pachauri is finally shoved aside by the IPCC in a desperate attempt to regain some degree of authority on climate change matters, nothing will change. The problem is not a wayward IPCC Chairman freelancing a personal political agenda, using climate change as a vehicle to realise a huge transfer of wealth from the developed world to the rapidly developing world, and a dramatic reduction in our standard of living. The whole entity is made up of politicised activists doing the exact same thing.
Changing the figurehead will not change the structure or integrity of the ship. The SS IPCC might look a little different, but its crew and destination will remain the same. Even when Pachauri has finally been pushed, or discovers enough humility to jump, the battle against political agendas masquerading as environmentalism will need to continue. The battle against Pachauri is one to expose the reality of the situation for a worldwide public that has been deceived for so long. But in reality it is a battle against the whole IPCC and the small corrupt cabal of core scientists who produce ‘reports’ generated using cherry picked data, that are then used by thousands of others as the baseline in climate science. We have a long way to go to drain the IPCC swamp and see the truth that is well hidden below the surface.