Amazongate is the story of IPCC being exposed for yet another false scare. IPCC based its conclusions on a WWF study which forecasted that as much 40% percent of the forests would disappear due to climate change induced drought. New peer reviewed studies now dismiss this claim as false.The first study used NASA's satellite imagery to publish a paper in a scientific journal - Geophysical Research Letters (Read detailed study here.) The study, authored by Arindam Samanta of Boston University found no significant difference in the greenness level of these forests between drought and non-drought years - confirming their high drought tolerance.In fact, NASA went further to attribute the effects of enhanced sunlight under drought conditions as actually increasing the capacity of rain-forests to thrive! Another peer reviewed study the National Academy of Sciences (Read here) drew similar conclusions. Quizzed by Christopher Booker in his investigation of Amazongate, Dr. Jose Marengo, a Brazilian National Institute for Space Research climate scientist and member of the IPCC conceded:
"The way that the WWF report calculated this 40% was totally wrong."So was this then a mere human error?Christopher Booker in his latest investigative report suggests this is not so and that there could be a more sinister motive behind such miscalculations:"WWF and other green campaign groups talking up the destruction of the Amazon rain-forests are among those who stand to make billions of dollars from the scare. This "green gold-rush" involves taking control of huge tracts of rain-forest supposedly to stop them being chopped down, and selling carbon credits gained from carbon dioxide emissions they claim will be "saved" Backed by a $30 million grant from the World Bank, the WWF has already partnered in a pilot scheme to manage 20 million acres in Brazil. If their plans get the go-ahead in Mexico at the end of the year, the forests will be worth over $60 billion in "carbon credits."This allegation of carbon profiteering not only damages WWF's own credibility but tends to drag down with it, all other advocacy programmes of the NGO/environmental sector as a whole.
Read more of Christopher Booker's article here
WWF has 'consultancies' to accredit carbon credits which is a racket. NGO money making at this scale is rather sickening.
ReplyDeleteHi Rajan.
ReplyDeleteThis may interest you - World Wide Fraud, Pandering to the Demands of Industry
Source http://www.eco-action.org/dod/no7/76-78.html
The paper documents how WWF oppresses tribal people in the name of nature conservatism. It is sickening
@Shoba. If you consider that sickening, what about this?
ReplyDelete"No doubt you’ve seen the ads. The music is dramatic. The scene is tragic. The message emotional. Polar Bears, holding on for dear life to bits of ice, their artic habitat destroyed by Global Warming. And the narration tells you of the tragic fate of the bears, all because of man and his selfish destruction of the earth. And of course, the ad ends with a plea for funds to help the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) protect the bears and stop Global Warming. Cute, fuzzy animals always do the trick.
Trouble is, it’s all a lie. Not one word of the ad is true. Polar Bears are not endangered. There is no indication of any reduction of their populations. In fact, they are actually being hunted by locals who have to live with them, in an effort to keep their populations down. Of 13 Polar Bear populations, 11 are thriving and growing."
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/9106
It wasn't that long ago that WWF came under criticism for basically writing the Australian Government Climate Policy even though it would stand to benefit from it. It seems conflicts on interest are becoming typical within the green industry
ReplyDeleteIt is amazing. They all like WWF keep on reiterating that climate change is real. If it is so real, why should they lie? Why should they demonstrate conflict of interests?
ReplyDeleteThis is why WWF and whole global warming movement stinks
WWF in 2007 warned that the number of penguins in the Antarctic was declining rapidly because the Antarctic peninsula was warming five times faster than the average in the rest of the world!
ReplyDeleteAnyone logical should immediately ask: Why should the Antarctic peninsula be warming five times faster than the average in the rest of the world ?
The answer is pretty simple. The Antarctic Peninsula is volcanic, part of the Pacific ‘ring of fire’. The melting ice at one part of the Antarctic is entirely natural; it has nothing whatsoever to do with ‘global warming’, man-made or otherwise. Apart from that one peninsular, the Antarctic ice sheet is actually getting thicker.
So it is precisely that we do not ask these questions that we end up conned by fraudsters like WWF
Forget the cuddly polar bears. Christoper Booker exposed WWF for what it really is - a money making scam
ReplyDeleteThe issue of climate change, or global warming, has become a rallying cry for any decent human being. For WWF it is for grabbing the mega bucks. Sad. So Sad
ReplyDeleteI think people around the world are absolutely sick of hearing about climate change. It has run it’s course. Now these revelations of NGOs scamming for billions of dollars
ReplyDeleteThese buffoons should pack up their troubles in their old kit bag and fade away into the evening sunset.
In a nutshell what the Oxfam report is all about is that it tells the tale how warmists were beaten blue and black by amateur bloggers. These bloggers made their point - climate science is an uncertain science and if so, no policy decisions can be made based on it.
ReplyDeleteDespite the asymmetrical contest, if amateur bloggers won hands down, then it also tell the tale on whose side the science lies. Recollect Kennedy's famous speech - we cannot fool all the people all the time. That time has come.