Wong the apologist defends IPCC

Will still be there for a very long time

An update on this story. Despite the fact that the IPCC has been caught out again, Penny Wong’s knee-jerk reaction is to defend them, because she knows, as well as anyone, that if the IPCC is peddling a crock of s#!t, then the government’s climate policy (on which it is 100% based) is not worth the paper it’s written on. So Penny’s doing her best (which isn’t saying much, let’s face it) to shore it up:

Climate Change Minister Penny Wong says a mistake made by a United Nations body on the predicted rate of glacial melting does not mean all its findings are wrong.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) claimed in a report that the glaciers in the Himalayas could vanish in 30 years.

However that claim was based on a conversation between a journalist and a single Indian scientist a decade ago, according to British newspaper the Sunday Times.

The Federal Opposition says this shows the organisation’s scientific findings lack credibility.

Opposition energy spokesman Nick Minchin says the mistake made by the IPCC calls into question the Government’s proposed emissions trading scheme.

“For Australia to act ahead of the rest of the world based on [Prime Minister Kevin] Rudd’s reliance on this UN committee, which we now find is presenting reports based on mere speculation, [would be a mistake],” he said.

But Ms Wong says the main claims of climate change science remain unchallenged.

“This is a report that has been peer reviewed extensively [Ah yes, peer-review, the be all and end all of climate science, so corrupt itself that few papers challenging the consensus ever get published, because the alarmists threaten and intimidate publications which consider doing so. See Climategate – Ed]; very few errors have been found in it and none that challenge the central findings,” she said.

“Climate change is real and human beings are contributing to it, and people like Senator Minchin, who have never believed in climate change, will jump on anything in order to justify their position.”

Yawn, yawn, yawn. Sorry Penny, but we’re all bored senseless by your repetitive, robotic pronouncements.

Read it here.

Comments

  1. Amazing how a significant error like this made it through the peer review by “thousands” of “scientists”. Do I detect a slight change in emphasis with Penny’s words, “Climate change is real and human beings are contributing to it…”. I am sure that the mantra was that humans caused global warming and if we went back to teepees and hunted wild tofu we could fix it. Just who/what are the other culprits and who/what is the actual main driver according to the Pwong? If we only contribute to global warming/climate change/extreme weather/or whatever term of art is being used today… that raises a whole string of other interesting questions. Shame on Sen Minchin and people like him for not “believing in” climate change. What herasy is this! I doubt he would “jump on anything” though Penny; that is just wishful thinking on your part. I hope she and Kevin keep digging that hole; it is not deep enough yet by a long way.

  2. Well there it is – one mistake does not a theory wreck!! Hey, we know e are the cause. What a load of BS…..

    Here’s a beauty though. Apparently Australia had a reduction of 2% in GHG emissions for 2009(?) according to BTN – ABC. Due to reduced energy generation from coal ?? But wait a minute, we also had the warmest year! How can that be, reduce GHG but still get warming, oh no something else must be happening. A lag??

    It just goes to show you that there really isn’t any need for the ETS, since we are reducing emissions anyway. And guess what – we’re not cooling the globe!!

    Note to KRudd/PWong – no need for ETS as GHG don’t heat up the planet.

    Note to Abbott – make sure the rest of Australia knows about this.

  3. Penny needs to read my article πŸ˜‰ The science is far from decided and far from being conclusive to say the least. My real worry is the ‘opportunity cost’ of all this focus on climate change, think what we could be spending all those taxes on instead? or don’t raise the taxes at all…

  4. Simon, first off, Nice blog!
    Now I wonder what your Penny has to say about Syed Hasnain’s relationships with the “Railway Engineer” Pachauri in light of being awarded a

    “$500.000 grant for β€œresearch, analysis and training on water-related security and humanitarian challenges to South Asia posed by melting Himalaya glaciers.” This helped Dr Pachauri set up the TERI Glaciology team, putting at its head now professor Syed Iqbal Hasnain.”

    Quote taken from:
    http://jamesdelingpole.com/2010/01/19/syed-hasnain-rk-pachauri-and-the-mystery-of-the-non-disappearing-glaciers/

    I wonder if Ms Wong (delightful name when used in relation to AGW but no doubt, as a newcomer to this blog, someone has already mentioned it!) can point me in the direction of exactly who peer reviewed the Glacier information and how the hell it got passed them that it was a crock of shite!

%d bloggers like this: