Monday, February 01, 2010

Headlines Monday 1st February 2010

=== Todays Toon ===

Obama clearly has a problem
=== Bible Quote ===
“You are forgiving and good, O Lord, abounding in love to all who call to you.”- Psalm 86:5
===

Obama administration looking for venues other than New York City to host terror trial while top Senate Republican predicts Congress will reject any funding requests.

New Record Deficit Predicted

Obama's $3.8T proposed budget predicts national deficit will crest at record-breaking $1.6T in current fiscal year

Obama 'Violates' Campaign Pledge
State Department official says awarding of no-bid contract to Dem donor 'violates' promise to crack down on practice

Group Takes Haiti Kids With Families
Haitian officials say most of the children taken by detained Americans still have family that survived the quake

Pakistan Taliban Chief Reportedly Killed in U.S. Drone Strike

The head of the Taliban in Pakistan, Hakimullah Mehsud, was killed in a U.S. drone attack, Pakistan state television reported Sunday.

MPs caught in travel perks fiasco
THIRTY-EIGHT former MPs have been sprung wrongly claiming tax-payer funded travel perks.

Teenager drowns trying to save friend
A TEENAGER has drowned while trying to save a friend who got into trouble in rough seas.

Aussie passengers face full-body scans
TOUGH security measures and religious rehabilitation part of new strategy to tackle terrorism

Courts giving crooks small-time sentences
SMALL number of serious criminals hit with maximum penalties as judgments fail to reflect the Government's tough crime talk.

Cronulla teenage bullies 'just bored'
A CRONULLA teen and his three friends bashed and robbed two younger boys, breaking one's nose and stamping on the other's head because they were "bored".

Dead crash teen's dream to be a cop

F KYLIE Poyner had followed her dream to its fruition, she would have been responding as a police officer to tragic car accidents. Instead, the 17-year-old's dream ended yesterday in a horror smash on the South Coast that killed her and left three of her friends seriously injured. One is fighting for her life.
=== Comments ===
Meet the Congressman Who Confronted President Obama

This is a rush transcript from "On the Record," January 29, 2010. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, FOX NEWS HOST: You want a showdown? Well, here it is. President Obama taking questions from House Republicans at a GOP retreat. It wasn't supposed to be televised, but at the last minute, the White House said, Bring it on. Bring the cameras in. Are they finally getting the hint about the cameras?

Republican congressman Jason Chaffetz asking the president about transparency.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JASON CHAFFETZ, R - UTAH: There's some things that have happened that I would appreciate your perspective on because I can look you in the eye and tell you we have not been obstructionists. The Democrats have the House and the Senate and the presidency. And when you stood up before the American people multiple times and said you would broadcast the health care debates on C-SPAN, you didn't. I was disappointed. I think a lot of Americans were disappointed.

You said you weren't going to allow lobbyists in the senior most positions within your administration, and yet you did. I applauded you when you said it and disappointed when you didn't. You said you'd go line by line through the health care debate -- or through the health care bill. And there were six of us, including Dr. Phil Roe, who sent you a letter and said, We would like to take you up on that offer. We'd like to come. We never heard (SIC) a letter. We never got a call. We were never involved in any of those discussions. (more at the link)
===
Climate-nervous Rudd tries a switch-and-bait
Andrew Bolt
Rudd ditches climate change as his excuse for an early election, and reaches for another excuse involving a de-facto tax:
KEVIN RUDD has pushed health to the top of the election agenda, accusing the opposition of robbing hospitals of $100 billion over the next four decades by refusing to allow the private health insurance rebate to be means tested.

The Prime Minister did not rule out supplanting climate change with health as a double-dissolution election trigger, saying he was tired of the Coalition blocking measures such as the means test out of ‘’pure ideological bloody-mindedness’’.
===
Cassidy warns: the media will verbal Abbott
Andrew Bolt
Barrie Cassidy, host of the ABC’s Insiders, suggests the media will attack Tony Abbott with more of the lies and slurs we saw last week over his advice to his daughters:
He will be verballed and the media is on to this sort of angle that they want, that he’s a social conservative who wants to impose all of those attitudes on to the rest of the community.

That seems to be their mindset and he was really badly treated over the Women’s Weekly article.
(Thanks to reader AW.)
===
Jon Faine holds a “debate”
Andrew Bolt

Jon Faine, the ABC climate alarmist who refused to discuss the Climategate scandal, finally allowed a sceptic onto his Melbourne morning show today. Yes, he gave Lord Monckton air time.

Good? Yes, but now see the caveats, restrictions and tipping of the playing field that came with this great concession.

First, Faine announced Monckton was a “denier” - using the deliberately offensive Holocaust denier analogy - and made extensive references to the funding (paltry and private) behind his trip. He also pointed out that Monckton was not a trained climate scientist.

Second, Faine brought in fellow alarmist Rupert Posner from the Climate Group to make the odds against Monckton two against one. (Faine for many months had Posner appear weekly on his show, alone and unchallenged (as have been so many of Faine’s alarmist guests), but could not allow Monckton the similar opportunity just once.)

Third, Faine failed to label Posner (a long-time green activist who has worked for Greenpeace) the way he’d labelled Monckton. He did not announce that Posner was as an “alarmist” or even “believer”, preferring to present him as some dispassionate expert. Nor did he declared that Posner, too, is no climate scientist, or declare Posner’s own huge funding sources, which depend on his Climate Group maintaing warming alarmism.

Fourth, Faine repeatedly interrupted and badgered Monckton, but not Posner.

Fifth, Faine repeatedly gave Posner the second (and final) word, allowing him to make a string of false claims with Monckton being given the chance to correct them, other than by interruptions, which were promptly quashed.

Sixth, Faine repeatedly allowed Posner and callers to abuse Monckton in the most offensive and childish manner, even calling him a “lunatic” and suggesting he was corrupt, saying what he said for the money. Monckton, typically, made not one personally derogatory remark in response.

Seventh, Faine did not challenge one of Posner’s more ludicrous claims, such as citing Victorian bushfires as proof of world-wide warming. The sole exception was when Posner claimed there had been no time when warmists had demanded an end to such debates on global warming. Not only did Faine inform him many callers actually wanted Monckton banned from the ABC - but Posner immediately said he agreed with such callers.

Eighth, Faine allowed the calls that got through to be entirely dominated by ones hostile to Monckton, when the text messages he later read out were largely from sceptical listeners. (I don’t accuse Faine of rigging the calls at all, but of allowing the segment to be either rigged by warmists or dominated by one shouting-down side.)

And ninth, Faine’s personal interventions were not just partisan but so ill-informed - or, rather, so informed by alarmism - that he even claimed “tsunamis” were caused by global warming. Thank heavens Monckton was at least allowed just enough time to point out gently that carbon dioxide emissions do not cause earthquakes.

All in all, proof of the extraordinary ABC bias on global warming that Faine in introducing this “debate” claimed did not exist.

Debate? You are yet to truly have it on your ABC.

UPDATE

Hear the “debate” here.
===
Now Stern was sexed-up, too
Andrew Bolt
Now the Stern report is found to have grabbed any alarmist report - especially out of Australia - that suited its agenda:
The Stern Review on the economics of climate change, which was commissioned by the Treasury, was greeted with headlines worldwide when it was published in October 2006

It contained dire predictions about the impact of climate change in different parts of the world.

But it can be revealed that when the report was printed by Cambridge University Press in January 2007, some of these predictions had been watered down because the scientific evidence on which they were based could not be verified.

Among the claims that were removed in the later version of the report, which is now also available in its altered form online, were claims that North West Australia has been hit by stronger tropical typhoons in the past 30 years.

Another claim that southern regions in Australia have lost rainfall due to rising ocean temperatures and air currents pushing rain further south was also removed.

Claims that eucalyptus and savannah habitats in Australia would also become more common were also deleted.

The claims were highlighted in several Australian newspapers when the report was initially published, but the changes were never publicly announced.
Amazing. For an insight into Stern’s cherry-picking frame of mind at the time he wrote his report, check what his spokesman concedes now:
Statements were identified in the section on Australia for which the relevant scientific references could not be located.
Next for us to check is this: who first made these wild claims for “which the relevant scientific references could not be located”? How many of these unsubstantiated claims from the initial Stern report were then accepted by Kevin Rudd’s guru, Ross Garnaut, who relied so heavily on Stern for his own report?
===
On yer bike, mayor
Andrew Bolt
Why is hypocrisy so common among green preachers? Is it that this cult is really just a licence to bully?
The green-tinged lord mayor of Sydney, Clover Moore, is involved in a nasty tiff with some of her constituents over plans to build a bicycle path along Bourke Street in Surry Hills. With construction about to begin on the path, a residents’ action group has seized upon a development application submitted by Moore’s architect husband, Peter Moore, to the council.

The residents’ complaint is that the bike path will wipe out dozens of parking spaces, forcing them to park their cars on nearby side streets, including on Moore’s own street, where parking is already at a premium. So it was with great delight that one resident noticed a development application on the council’s website, submitted by Peter Moore, which revealed that the Moores had in recent years received permission to build a garage, removing the need to park on the street. The DA also revealed they had received permission to install air-conditioning - prompting charges of hypocrisy, given that sustainability and climate change are top of the lord mayoral agenda.
(Thanks to many readers.)

UPDATE

Several readers ask: You now need permission to install air conditioners in NSW?
===
Just when you think the Pakistani team could fall no lower
Andrew Bolt

Pakistan loses the Tests 3-0 and the One Day games 5-0/ But it took last night’s acting captain, Shahid Afridi, a player I’ve much liked, to lose the team its last shred of respect.

But the fool who then tackled Khalid Latif (end of the clip) is our shame. Jail him, and asked the security company why it employs staff at the ground who can’t outrun a drunk.
===
How to make Australians racist
Andrew Bolt
India’s Outlook magazine demonstrates perfectly an old journalist trick to get precisely the (false) answers it wants, without actually lying.

In this case, the magazine wants to prove that Indians in Australia are routinely bashed for sport by “white Australians”. So first it needs to find someone mad enough to make that claim, when all the evidence suggests many of the bashings are actually by ethnic attackers instead.

Bingo. Why not ask someone who is a Marxist and an artist with an interest in proving white Australia is corrupt, and who - even better - is related to the Prime Minister so will seem credible:
Kevin Rudd’s nephew and anti-racism activist, Van Thanh Rudd, told Outlook the “dominant culture in Australia is a racist culture” and that he had no doubt the attacks had been racially motivated
Oh, yes. Don’t call him Marxist, of course, because that might give the game away.

Next you need a response. And that’s best given by representatives of this alleged racist underbelly, not matter how unrepresentative of anyone they actually are:
The Outlook story included comments by right-wing groups in Australia. Jim Saleam, NSW head of anti-immigration party Australia First, said Indians were “becoming a serious threat to white Australians in the job market”. Bob Vinnicombe of One Nation said the Government “should actively encourage bringing in Christians and white people from Zimbabwe and South Africa”.
There. That makes the racists seem terrible organised and numerous. Job done - you’ve slimed a huge majority by simply reporting a slanging match between a few extremists..
===
Sometimes the conspiracy does exist
Andrew Bolt
Kevin Rudd last year mocked claims that global warmist politicians planned to create a new world governing body:
Enter the “world government” conspiracy theorists.
Caroline Boin suggests the claims were only too-well founded:
EVERYONE is blaming everyone else for the failure of the Copenhagen climate conference but British Prime Minister Gordon Brown blames something else: “The lack of a global body with the sole responsibility for environmental stewardship.”

This idea for getting around pesky governments and voters is shared by many European and some developing countries.

Last September, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy wrote to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, saying: “We must make use of the momentum provided by Copenhagen to make further progress toward the creation of a world environmental organisation.”
As Boin notes, such an organisation could have an incredible licence to interfere in decisions best left to democracies themselves.
===
Now the terrorist is the bomb
Andrew Bolt
As cunning as they are mad:
An operation by the UK intelligence service MI5 uncovered evidence that al-Qaeda was planning a new stage in its terror campaign by surgically inserting explosives inside terrorists, British newspaper The Mail on Sunday reported.

The explosive pentaerythritol tetranitrate, commonly known as PETN, would be placed in a plastic sachet inside the bomber’s body before the wound was stitched up like a normal operation incision and allowed to heal, experts said.

===
Prepare your homes, don’t just flee them
Andrew Bolt
The preaching of panic since the Black Saturday fires - in particular the urging that people flee their homes under the new code red warnings of “catastrophic” risk - are simply likely to get a lot more people hurt, as I’ve warned before:
VICTORIAN women are more likely than men to abandon bushfire-prone homes, but many will do it late and risk death, a report has found.
We live in an age of government-sponsored panics, and this is among the most irresponsible of them. Decades of experience with fires tells us that people are generally safer in their own homes in a bushfire. By so loudly urging people to flee instead, governments are encouraging the false hope that homeowners don’t really need to make their homes fire safe, and can just outrun the flames instead.

And then there’s the risk of all these false alarms. How many more times will people heed the official warnings to flee?
===
What was Obama’s point again?
Andrew Bolt
I thought the Obama administration’s mad decision to offer al Qaeda chieftain Khalid Sheik Mohammed a civilian trial was to show the world America would not give him a kangaroo trial. Yet:

Accused Sept. 11 plotter Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is likely to be executed after being tried and convicted, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Sunday
===
No, it’s just Pachauri who was feeling too hot
Andrew Bolt

Rajendra Pachauri has had other things on his mind, which may help explain why he’s allowed the IPCC under his leadership to become mired in allegations of fraud, exaggeration, deceit and cherry-picking.

You see, Pachauri has been thinking a lot about sex, and has even written a lot about it in his new steamy novel:
In breathless prose that risks making Dr Pachauri, who will be 70 this year, a laughing stock among the serious, high-minded scientists and world leaders with whom he mixes, he details sexual encounter after sexual encounter.

The book, which makes reference to the Kama Sutra, starts promisingly enough as it tells the story of a climate expert with a lament for the denuded mountain slopes of Nainital, in northern India, where deforestation by the timber mafia and politicians has “endangered the fragile ecosystem”.

But talk of “denuding” is a clue of what is to come.

By page 16, Sanjay is ready for his first liaison with May in a hotel room in Nainital.
Adults can read more here.
===
Child advises IPCC
Andrew Bolt
Latest IPCC shock. Bakers Delight reveals that one of this discredited UN body’s sources is just some primary school kid in Australia.

Yet Kevin Rudd would actually approve. Honest to God, just last month in his speech at Copenhagen he told IPCC to take the advice of a six-year-old:
Before I left Australia, I was presented with a book of handwritten letters from a group of 6 year olds.

One of the letters is from Gracie. Gracie is six - “Hi” she wrote. “My name is Gracie. How old are you.” Gracie continues “I am writing to you because I want you all to be strong in Copenhagen… Please listen to us as it is our future.” I fear that at this conference, we are on the verge of letting little Gracie down.


===
Windschuttle: Manne must step down
Andrew Bolt
Keith Windschuttle on one of the key academics behind the “stolen generations” myth:
Robert Manne, professor of politics at La Trobe University, should stand down from his position while an independent inquiry is conducted into his false claims about Commonwealth government support in the 1930s for a policy of “breeding out the colour"…

The charges I have made here against Manne are, if confirmed by a proper inquiry, serious breaches of academic conduct on a matter of considerable national significance. As a publicly-funded institution, La Trobe University has a responsibility to investigate them independently and impartially. Manne has a duty to follow other academics in his situation and stand down from his post until any investigation is complete.
Windschuttle’s case against Manne, who cannot name even 10 of the 25,000 Aboriginal children he claimed were stolen just for racist reasons, is here.
===
STERN REVIEWED
Tim Blair
The ever-widening climate fraud scandal now has a compelling local angle, following revelations that Britain’s Stern Review originally contained bogus Australian content – content that was later quietly removed:
The Stern Review on the economics of climate change, which was commissioned by the Treasury, was greeted with headlines worldwide when it was published in October 2006.

It contained dire predictions about the impact of climate change in different parts of the world.

But it can be revealed that when the report was printed by Cambridge University Press in January 2007, some of these predictions had been watered down because the scientific evidence on which they were based could not be verified.
According to the UK Telegraph, those unverifiable elements included:

• “Claims that North West Australia has been hit by stronger tropical typhoons in the past 30 years.”

• “Another claim that southern regions in Australia have lost rainfall due to rising ocean temperatures and air currents pushing rain further south.”

• “Claims that eucalyptus and savannah habitats in Australia would also become more common.”

We in Australia had warning of Nicholas Stern’s unreliability ("You can’t export an American car to China: it does not satisfy the emissions standards"). In fact, two local angles are now open. Firstly, which Australian sources provided the information that was later discarded? And secondly:
The claims were highlighted in several Australian newspapers when the report was initially published, but the changes were never publicly announced.
Readers are invited to commence a Google hunt for those 2006 Australian newspaper reports. Name and shame! The Stern Review is also under attack in the US:
Robert Muir-Wood, head of research at Risk Management Solutions, a US-based consultancy, said the Stern report misquoted his work to suggest a firm link between global warming and the frequency and severity of disasters such as floods and hurricanes …

Muir-Wood said his research showed no such thing and accused Stern of “going far beyond what was an acceptable extrapolation of the evidence”.

The criticism is among the strongest made of the Stern report, which, since its publication in 2006, has influenced policy, including green taxes.
How does the Stern camp respond?
A spokesman for Stern said: “Muir-Wood may have been deceived by his own observations.”
Those observations will trick you every time. That line recalls a Brisbane feminist’s dismissal of genital mutilation victim Ayaan Hirsi Ali: “Her view on Islam is too much coloured by her own experience …”
===
HE ADMITTED IT!
Tim Blair
Drawn into dispute at fact-challenged fact-checker Tim Lambert’s scientism site, UK Daily Mail journalist David Rose comments:
I realise that nothing I write here will make a scrap of difference to you.
Lambert – a university lecturer (true!) – responds:
David Rose admits that he has no credibility … in a comment left here David Rose has admitted that he has no credibility, conceding that “nothing I write here will make a scrap of difference”.
This is easily the most brilliant smackdown ever achieved in internet history, and will remain so until the next time a 12-year-old girl goes bitchwild on Twitter. At issue between Lambert and Rose are matters of accuracy and ethics, on which Lambert is massively qualified to comment.

UPDATE. Joanne Nova cites Lambert for pollution.
===
OUCHY
Tim Blair
At least she didn’t use petrol:
The first Portland Police officer to arrive on the scene of the man who set himself on fire Wednesday outside the Nicholas Ungar Furs store accidentally used pepper spray in an attempt to put out the flames instead of a fire extinguisher, officials at the Portland Police Bureau said Thursday.
===
RELIGION GENE DETECTED
Tim Blair
California councilwoman Sherry Marquez could reasonably be accused of many things, depending on your point of view, but racism isn’t one of them. Simple rule: if you can convert to it, it’s nothing to do with race.
===
RETURN TO ALGORA
Tim Blair
When he isn’t covering up bogus climate claims, IPCC boss Rajendra Pachauri uncovers rampant science-based hotness. Pachauri’s latest work of fiction is intended to warm more than just globes:
Return to Almora, published in Dr Pachauri’s native India earlier this month, tells the story of Sanjay Nath, an academic in his 60s reminiscing on his “spiritual journey” through India, Peru and the US.

On the way he encounters, among others, Shirley MacLaine, the actress, who appears as a character in the book. While relations between Sanjay and MacLaine remain platonic, he enjoys sex – a lot of sex – with a lot of women.
But Sanjay isn’t merely an “academic”. That wouldn’t make any sense at all. Instead, Pachauri’s protagonist is someone no woman could resist:
The book, which makes reference to the Kama Sutra, starts promisingly enough as it tells the story of a climate expert with a lament for the denuded mountain slopes of Nainital, in northern India, where deforestation by the timber mafia and politicians has “endangered the fragile ecosystem”.
Oh, Sanjay! My glaciers are melting!

UPDATE. Pachauri goes for a ride.

UPDATE II. Pachauri in the hot seat:

Good question from interviewer Saeed Naqvi: “Are you trying to say that the science editor of the Times is part of a big, diabolical conspiracy against you?” Other interview highlights:

Pachauri on his credibility: “I may have lost credibility and favour as far as these sceptics are concerned, which is only a clear testimony to the fact that I’m effective. Why are they attacking me? Because they realise I’m effective in spreading the message of climate change.” (And a swell job you’re doing, Raj.)

On Christopher Monckton: “People laugh at him wherever he goes. He can’t collect ten people to address …” (For once, Pachauri underplays the evidence.)

On his friend: “Al Gore has enough confidence in me and he’s indicated that. He thinks that I can handle it.” (Let’s hear him say this in public.)

On Himalayan glaciers: “The glaciers are melting. Now whether they melt by 2035 or 2050 is another matter.” (So it was simply a 15-year difference, not a several-centuries one.)

Although he’s a friend of the IPCC chairman – he calls him “Patchy” – Saeed Naqvi proves a teasing ("You’ve trimmed your beard, haven’t you? It makes you look less like Rasputin") and testing interrogator. This exchange is revealing:

Pachauri: “I’m told that I wear $1000 suits, which I don’t …”

Naqvi: “But that jacket is from Savile Row.”

Pachauri: “Well, that’s, that’s borrowed. I don’t even own it.”

Naqvi ends the interview with an admonition:
Travel less, go into the Himalayas, and reflect upon the mistakes that you may have made.
===
SURRY HILLS STANDOFF
Tim Blair
Cat (bottom left) and cockatoo (top right) maintain a tense vigil:

In other creature conflicts:

• Wild turkeys vs Athens, Georgia

• Dog vs seal

• And via David Thompson: owl vs aerodynamic resistance
===
SCIENTISTS UNSETTLED
Tim Blair
Wisconsin’s Kimberly Jo Simac hoped to host a global warming debate – but warmenists were too scared:
I invited scientists from all over the country — even some from around the world — to a fair and balanced event. I was amazed at the lack of response to the many invitations that went out, but more interesting were the insulting, mocking, sarcastic replies I received from scientists who seem to share a similar belief that a debate is ridiculous on such a settled science …

All the replies seem peculiar to me. If my career had been based on investigating something and I was so certain of my data, why would I not want to defend it? Suspicious, to say the least. It’s like pleading the fifth; it usually means you are hiding or protecting something.

I wonder what these scientists are hiding.
They’re hiding the decline. Their own, in several cases.
===
MOMOMOMOTOWN
Tim Blair
“I do believe this is a new record,” reports Mark Steyn. “The Four Mohammeds are the first all-Mo gang. Any quintets out there like to challenge for the prize?”
===
AMAZON EXPANDED
Tim Blair
“The IPCC has lost a lot of credibility in recent years,” writes Benny Peiser. “It is also losing the trust of more and more governments who are no longer following its advice – as the Copenhagen summit showed.” Australia won’t be shaken off so easily; it takes more than the IPCC’s complete humiliation to destroy our faith. And the humiliation continues:
A startling report by the United Nations climate watchdog that global warming might wipe out 40% of the Amazon rainforest was based on an unsubstantiated claim by green campaigners who had little scientific expertise …

[The campaigners] suggested that “up to 40% of Brazilian rainforest was extremely sensitive to small reductions in the amount of rainfall” but made clear that this was because drier forests were more likely to catch fire.
It’s bad enough, but not surprising, that the IPCC ran this non-reviewed, non-scientific nonsense. But the really cool part is that the IPCC itself beat up the claims:
The IPCC report picked up this reference but expanded it to cover the whole Amazon. It also suggested that a slight reduction in rainfall would kill many trees directly, not just by contributing to more fires.
This must be how peer review works. As for the IPCC’s source, an investigation is now underway:
WWF said it prided itself on the accuracy of its reports and was investigating the latest concerns. “We have a team of people looking at this internationally,” said Keith Allott, its climate change campaigner.
That’s what they had in the first place. Maybe they should try something different, like not making stuff up.
===
TURNS A KIA INTO A CAR
Tim Blair

Via Craig McFarlane, a cruel Miataphobe, who emails: “It’s the perfect accessory for an MX-5.”

UPDATE. Audio-combustion researcher Ed Driscoll: “The Mattel toy company beat the SoundRacer V8 to the market by almost 50 years.” No word on whether it has an MX-5 application, however.
===
HE’LL BELIEVE ANYTHING
Tim Blair
What Kevin Rudd believed in 2008:
I just look at what the scientists say. There’s a group of scientists called the International Panel on Climate Change - 4000 of them. Guys in white coats who run around and don’t have a sense of humour. They just measure things. And what they say to us is it’s happening and it’s caused by human activity …

I stand by what the International Panel of Climate Change scientists have had to say.
And what we know in 2010:
The United Nations’ expert panel on climate change based claims about ice disappearing from the world’s mountain tops on a student’s dissertation and an article in a mountaineering magazine.

The revelation will cause fresh embarrassment for the The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which had to issue a humiliating apology earlier this month over inaccurate statements about global warming.
(Via Larry T.)

No comments: