April 15, 2012 (BBC) Some Asian glaciers putting on mass. Some glaciers near the Himalayas are putting on mass and scientists don’t know why. The full article is available at:
Climate politics (and science too unfortunately) is all about creating an urgent need. If there is no urgent need, there is no funding….and if there is no funding, there is no employment. Governments have trouble focusing if the need is not urgent.
Virtually all funding in climate science is government funding. Climate scientists are usually consultants, working for governments or universities on a government grant. And we all know what a consultants first job is…..maintaining employment.
A consultant that does not find a problem, does not maintain employment. This set of circumstances can cause extraordinarily odd events as scientists search for ways to stay employed.
Enter the 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Synopses Report on global climate. The IPCC has been producing climate reports since 1992, the 2007 version is their fourth iteration of the process.
When it was released in September of 2007, it predicted the glaciers in the Himalayas would be gone by 2035. Gone completely in only 28 years. What to do next…..hire lots of consultants of course.
In December of 2009, J. Graham Cogley, a professor at Ontario Trent University, stated (according to another BBC article) that the IPCC was off by more than 300 years.
In January of 2010, the IPCC admitted they made a mistake. The IPCC is quoted as the authority all over the world….the Himalaya Glacier prediction was a really big deal…and their 28 year prediction was off by more than 300 years. Wow. Can you say wild ass guess.
Let’s return to the BBC article dated April 15, 2012. A group of French scientists used satellite data to demonstrate that the Karakoram range (a range next to the Himalayas which includes K-2 the second highest mountain in the world) has been putting on mass. We learn that the region is very remote and very difficult to study. It is clear from the article that there is still much to learn about the dynamics of ice and the Himalayas.
All this begs the question….How and why did the IPCC come up with their prediction? I don’t know, but I suspect future employment opportunities might have been a factor.