Using the year 2035 was never a typo.

The year 2350 was used by a V M Kotlyakov in his completely unrelated report called “Variations of snow and ice in the past and present on a global and regional scale”.” It had nothing to do with the Himalayan glaciers.

Here is what Kotlyakov said about the worlds snow and ice coverage ……… its total area will shrink from 500,000 to 100,000 km2 by the year 2350. ……….

Pachauri (Him a lyer) and his IPCC team of the worlds most superior scientists must have liked the ring of that sentence. It must have sounded even better when they changed the date from 2350 to 2035 and then pasted it into the WWF report. Of interest, the IPCC claims that they got that sentence from the WWF. They did not. They lie.

Believe it or not, and I have to say, Joe, don’t believe anything related to the IPCC, the year 2035 was used a second time in the same paragraph. This was in the preceding sentence that claimed that the Himalayan glaciers would vanish by the year 2035.

I would love to be able to tell you how it got used a second time in a different context but I just do not know. I suppose I never will and nor will anyone else. That year 2035 was used in the New Scientist article which in turn became the modified WWF report and then became the modified IPCC report. The New Scientist says that the date was given to them, over the phone, by the now comfortably employed scientist Hasnein. He now denies it. However he was a colleague of the above Kotlyakov and must have been familiar with his report. We can only speculate how Kotlyakov’s year 2350 was passed on by Hasnein and became the year 2035 in the New Scientist.

Here is a clue. About the same time as the publication of the New Scientist article, an Indian Government public information website quoted the year 2035 in relation to the vanishing of those glaciers. It directly quotes both Hasnein and Votlyakov as stating the year 2035. (in fact it quotes Kotlyakov’s exact sentence that was pasted into the IPCC report – except that Kotlyakov’s year had now become 2035).

I am sorry that this is so long. I find it hard to condense all this junk. Anything less would be unjust to Dr. John Nielsen-Gammon, Climatologist for the State of Texas, who tracked all this down.

Confusing? Try this. That paragraph tells us that the ice coverage will be reduced to 100,000 Km2; (one fifth) yet later in the report we are told that the present ice coverage of the Himalayan Glaciers is 300,000 Km2.

So as I now understand the official position of the worlds premier scientific body, We have glaciers that in 25 years will melt away to nothing and also shrink by four fifths such that their size increases by three times.

The IPCC should regret that this is a lot more than clumsy avaricious stupidity. Not even the New Scientist or WWF reports were that stupid. It took a highly qualified, highly paid and highly intelligent IPCC scientist to paste that bit into the WWF report ……. or was it the 2,400 scientists that we keep hearing about?