Early last December it became obvious the IPCC had erred in warning that Himilayan glaciers might melt by 2035. As with any bureaucracy the IPCC immediately stonewalled:
When asked how this "error" could have happened, RK Pachauri, the Indian scientist who heads the IPCC, said: "I don't have anything to add on glaciers."
The error happened because the IPCC relied on dubious sources:
Murari Lal, a climate expert who was one of the leading authors of the 2007 IPCC report, denied it had its facts wrong about melting Himalayan glaciers.
But he admitted the report relied on non-peer reviewed - or 'unpublished' - documents when assessing the status of the glaciers.
A new study contradicting the IPPC glacier melt prediction was not exactly well received:
Mr Pachauri dismissed the study as "voodoo science" and said the IPCC was a "sober body" whose work was verified by governments.
Governments verifying science, now isn't that encouraging. This all starting to look, well, very unscientific. So the IPCC now has no choice but to admit the error:
Murari Lal, who oversaw the chapter on Himalayan glaciers in the 2007 IPCC report, said on the weekend he was considering recommending that the claim about glaciers be dropped.
Even though Lal was the man in charge he's not to blame for the screw-up:
Professor Lal admits he knows little about glaciers.
I could use a few extra bucks, maybe the IPCC will pay me to write a chapter in its next report.
By the way, Tim Blair has a nice little round-up on this story. Go here.