Talk-Polywell.org

The scientist behind the bogus claim in a Nobel Prize-winning UN report that Himalayan glaciers will have melted by 2035 last night admitted it was included purely to put political pressure on world leaders.

Dr Murari Lal also said he was well aware the statement, in the 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), did not rest on peer-reviewed scientific research.

In an interview with The Mail on Sunday, Dr Lal, the co-ordinating lead author of the report’s chapter on Asia, said: ‘It related to several countries in this region and their water sources. We thought that if we can highlight it, it will impact policy-makers and politicians and encourage them to take some concrete action.

‘It had importance for the region, so we thought we should put it in.’

chrismb wrote:Axiomatically, I think your poll is flawed because it implies scientists should influence politics.

Perhaps the questions could be a) should scientists seek to play a role in politics, and if so b) should they act as i) passive consultants, or ii) active agents for change.

If a scientist goes down the route of b) ii) then I would say they are no longer scientists doing a bit of politics, they are politicians doing a bit of science.

If I were to become a "b) ii)" candidate, then I would then simply answer by correcting one of the very flawed sayings I was given as a child.

I say; "the ends always justify the means".

Josh Cryer wrote:How does "I was aware it wasn't peer reviewed" mean "I lied"? At least he's manning up, and hopefully this will make IPCC AR5 much better.