PDA

View Full Version : Environment U.N. climate panel admits Dutch sea level flaw


petegz28
02-14-2010, 11:58 AM
OSLO (Reuters) - The U.N. panel of climate experts overstated how much of the Netherlands is below sea level, according to a preliminary report on Saturday, admitting yet another flaw after a row last month over Himalayan glacier melt.

Green Business | COP15

A background note by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said a 2007 report wrongly stated that 55 percent of the country was below sea level since the figure included areas above sea level, prone to flooding along rivers.

The United Nations has said errors in the 2007 report of about 3,000 pages do not affect the core conclusions that human activities, led by burning fossil fuels, are warming the globe.

"The sea level statistic was used for background information only, and the updated information remains consistent with the overall conclusions," the IPCC note dated February 12 said.

Skeptics say errors have exposed sloppiness and over-reliance on "grey literature" outside leading scientific journals. The panel's reports are a main guide for governments seeking to work out costly policies to combat global warming.

The 2007 report included the sentence: "The Netherlands is an example of a country highly susceptible to both sea level rise and river flooding because 55 percent of its territory is below sea level."

"A preliminary analysis suggests that the sentence discussed should end with: 'because 55 percent of the Netherlands is at risk of flooding'," the IPCC note said.

The Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, the original source of the incorrect data, said on February 5 that just 26 percent of the country is below sea level and 29 percent susceptible to river flooding.

The IPCC said the error was widespread -- it quoted a report from the Dutch Ministry of Transport saying "about 60 percent" of the country is below sea level, and a European Commission study saying "about half."

The panel expressed regret last month after admitting that the 2007 report exaggerated the pace of melt of the Himalayan glaciers, which feed rivers from China to India in dry seasons, in a sentence that said they could all vanish by 2035.

The 2035 figure did not come from a scientific journal.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE61C1V420100213

petegz28
02-14-2010, 11:58 AM
Yet another IPCC "oops" moment. No wonder the entire world save Obma and Boxer are pulling away from this group.

petegz28
02-14-2010, 12:01 PM
The Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, the original source of the incorrect data, said on February 5 that just 26 percent of the country is below sea level and 29 percent susceptible to river flooding.

River flooding. Don't ya know all rivers are at or below sea level? The next time your basement floods you may consider moving to a place above sea level.

irishjayhawk
02-14-2010, 02:47 PM
Sounds like a non-issue.

I mean from the article:
"The sea level statistic was used for background information only, and the updated information remains consistent with the overall conclusions," the IPCC note dated February 12 said.

The 2007 report included the sentence: "The Netherlands is an example of a country highly susceptible to both sea level rise and river flooding because 55 percent of its territory is below sea level."

"A preliminary analysis suggests that the sentence discussed should end with: 'because 55 percent of the Netherlands is at risk of flooding'," the IPCC note said.

The Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, the original source of the incorrect data, said on February 5 that just 26 percent of the country is below sea level and 29 percent susceptible to river flooding.

Seems like a simple transcription error.

Saul Good
02-14-2010, 02:51 PM
Sounds like a non-issue.

I mean from the article:




Seems like a simple transcription error.

It is a non-issue. All but the most devout had already dismissed the entire report as a propaganda piece.

irishjayhawk
02-14-2010, 02:52 PM
It is a non-issue. All but the most devout had already dismissed the entire report as a propaganda piece.

I see what you did there....

Bwana
02-14-2010, 04:56 PM
SHOCKING!

petegz28
02-14-2010, 05:39 PM
Sounds like a non-issue.

I mean from the article:




Seems like a simple transcription error.

Yea, just ANOTHER error. The IPCC has been suffering from a bunch of these "non-issue" type of errors as of late. Which is why India and the Netherlands have both pulled away from the Un and the IPCC on the subject.

irishjayhawk
02-14-2010, 06:26 PM
Yea, just ANOTHER error. The IPCC has been suffering from a bunch of these "non-issue" type of errors as of late. Which is why India and the Netherlands have both pulled away from the Un and the IPCC on the subject.

This wasn't the IPCC. Per the article:

The Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, the original source of the incorrect data, said on February 5 that just 26 percent of the country is below sea level and 29 percent susceptible to river flooding.

orange
02-14-2010, 06:28 PM
Yea, just ANOTHER error. The IPCC has been suffering from a bunch of these "non-issue" type of errors as of late. Which is why India and the Netherlands have both pulled away from the Un and the IPCC on the subject.

Those Indians and their vast psychic powers!! Better than Edgar Cayce ever was!!

India makes big push to study Himalayan ecology
September 29th, 2009 - 8:14 pm ICT by IANS -

New Delhi, Sep 29 (IANS) Urbanisation, irresponsible tourism, overuse of water, badly planned power and infrastructure projects and deforestation are all affecting the Himalayas, acknowledged a report released by the government here Tuesday.

Prepared by the Almora-based G.B. Pant Institute of Himalayan Environment and Development for the Ministry of Environment and Forests, the report lists guidelines and “best practices” in each of these areas.

The report will form a key input into the formulation of India’s National Mission for Sustaining the Himalayan Ecosystem, under India’s National Action Plan for Climate Change, Minister of State for Environment and Forests Jairam Ramesh told reporters while releasing the report.

To study the Himalayan ecosystem - one of the worst victims of climate change - the government is also setting up 15 weather monitoring stations as well as asking the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) to use its satellites to track changes to the environment.

A national institute of Himalayan glaciology is also being set up as part of the Dehradun-based Wadia Institute of Himalayan Glaciology, Ramesh said.

With widespread fears that Himalayan glaciers - that supply water to major river systems of South Asia including the Ganga, Brahmaputra and Indus - are receding due to global warming, Ramesh said: “India must have its own capacity to monitor the health of the glaciers.”

He expected the plan for the National Mission for Sustaining the Himalayan Ecosystem to be ready in a couple of months.



More at : India makes big push to study Himalayan ecology http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/enviornment/india-makes-big-push-to-study-himalayan-ecology_100253853.html#ixzz0fYkyUINh

orange
02-14-2010, 06:30 PM
Of course, even the Indians don't compare to YOU who sees the Netherlands "pulling out of the IPCC" - when exactly?

Saul Good
02-14-2010, 06:55 PM
This wasn't the IPCC. Per the article:

Seems that they will just reprint anything that fits their agenda regardless of whether or not it's been verified.

irishjayhawk
02-14-2010, 06:58 PM
Seems that they will just reprint anything that fits their agenda regardless of whether or not it's been verified.

Where does it say they reprinted it with error?

I see it says they corrected the error.

Saul Good
02-14-2010, 07:16 PM
Where does it say they reprinted it with error?

I see it says they corrected the error.

I can see how you missed it. You would have had to have read all the way until you got to the second sentence of the opening post.

"A background note by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said a 2007 report wrongly stated that 55 percent of the country was below sea level since the figure included areas above sea level, prone to flooding along rivers.

The United Nations has said errors in the 2007 report of about 3,000 pages do not affect the core conclusions that human activities, led by burning fossil fuels, are warming the globe."

irishjayhawk
02-14-2010, 09:47 PM
I can see how you missed it. You would have had to have read all the way until you got to the second sentence of the opening post.

"A background note by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said a 2007 report wrongly stated that 55 percent of the country was below sea level since the figure included areas above sea level, prone to flooding along rivers.

The United Nations has said errors in the 2007 report of about 3,000 pages do not affect the core conclusions that human activities, led by burning fossil fuels, are warming the globe."

I don't see where it says the IPCC published the report. I see they just said a 2007 report was in error. By the way the article read it is reasonable to interpret the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency as the publisher where the IPCC is an editor of such.

And even if IPCC did publish the report themselves, they had no obligation to put a PR statement forth to say they corrected an error.

petegz28
02-14-2010, 09:50 PM
I don't see where it says the IPCC published the report. I see they just said a 2007 report was in error. By the way the article read it is reasonable to interpret the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency as the publisher where the IPCC is an editor of such.

And even if IPCC did publish the report themselves, they had no obligation to put a PR statement forth to say they corrected an error.

A background note by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said a 2007 report wrongly stated that 55 percent of the country was below sea level since the figure included areas above sea level, prone to flooding along rivers.

irishjayhawk
02-14-2010, 09:51 PM
A background note by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said a 2007 report wrongly stated that 55 percent of the country was below sea level since the figure included areas above sea level, prone to flooding along rivers.

Yes, and in my interpretation of the article, this reads as the IPCC is correcting the Netherlands report.

Playing editor as it were.

Saul Good
02-14-2010, 09:55 PM
Yes, and in my interpretation of the article, this reads as the IPCC is correcting the Netherlands report.

Playing editor as it were.

This makes absolutely no sense. Are they checking comic books for spelling errors as well? Why would they be putting out releases regarding a 3 year old report produced by someone else?

irishjayhawk
02-14-2010, 09:58 PM
This makes absolutely no sense. Are they checking comic books for spelling errors as well? Why would they be putting out releases regarding a 3 year old report produced by someone else?

Reviewing data is generally done in science. Someone probably alerted them to a mismatch in data, they checked it out, and issued a statement detailing their findings.

It doesn't really matter either way - if they were directly responsible or not.

Saul Good
02-14-2010, 09:58 PM
And even if IPCC did publish the report themselves, they had no obligation to put a PR statement forth to say they corrected an error.

They didn't correct it on their own. They were called on their bullshit.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.8d6e5773c60565dfc6e882b0a8dcbf18.4e1&show_article=1
The Netherlands has asked the UN climate change panel to explain an inaccurate claim in a landmark 2007 report that more than half the country was below sea level, the Dutch government said Friday.

According to the Dutch authorities, only 26 percent of the country is below sea level, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will be asked to account for its figures, environment ministry spokesman Trimo Vallaart told AFP.

irishjayhawk
02-14-2010, 10:00 PM
They didn't correct it on their own. They were called on their bullshit.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.8d6e5773c60565dfc6e882b0a8dcbf18.4e1&show_article=1
The Netherlands has asked the UN climate change panel to explain an inaccurate claim in a landmark 2007 report that more than half the country was below sea level, the Dutch government said Friday.

According to the Dutch authorities, only 26 percent of the country is below sea level, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will be asked to account for its figures, environment ministry spokesman Trimo Vallaart told AFP.

Fair enough. They were called on it, investigated it and reported what they found.

Interestingly:

The Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, the original source of the incorrect data, said on February 5 that just 26 percent of the country is below sea level and 29 percent susceptible to river flooding.

Saul Good
02-14-2010, 10:02 PM
Fair enough. They were called on it, investigated it and reported what they found.

Interestingly:

Like I said, they find sources that fit their narrative, and they run with them; fact-checking be damned.

irishjayhawk
02-14-2010, 10:04 PM
Like I said, they find sources that fit their narrative, and they run with them; fact-checking be damned.

Even with the correction, it still fits their narrative. The article points this out, even.

Saul Good
02-14-2010, 10:04 PM
Even with the correction, it still fits their narrative. The article points this out, even.

Fake but accurate.

irishjayhawk
02-14-2010, 10:08 PM
Fake but accurate.

Uh, what?

Saul Good
02-14-2010, 10:13 PM
Uh, what?

It's just like Dan Rather's documents. They were fake but accurate. This report is full of fabrications and inaccuracies, but it's okay. They are still a reliable source of information.

irishjayhawk
02-14-2010, 10:14 PM
It's just like Dan Rather's documents. They were fake but accurate. This report is full of fabrications and inaccuracies, but it's okay. They are still a reliable source of information.

It's actually 1 report from the IPCC. I don't see all of them having errors. Did I miss where they said ALL reports from the IPCC incorrectly said _____?

Saul Good
02-14-2010, 10:19 PM
It's actually 1 report from the IPCC. I don't see all of them having errors. Did I miss where they said ALL reports from the IPCC incorrectly said _____?

Do you even know what report is being discussed here? This wasn't some run of the mill magazine clipping.

orange
02-14-2010, 11:16 PM
Do you even know what report is being discussed here? This wasn't some run of the mill magazine clipping.

Yeah, it's 3000 pages PACKED with data.

Probably tens of thousands of facts.

And they got three wrong.

That about sums it up, doesn't it?

http://www1.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/assessments-reports.htm