Many might want to believe the United Nations, a world political mediation body created in the aftermath of World War 2, would be a friend of climate science since they are the governing body behind the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) - but they are instead advocates.
When advocates take center stage and make cringe-worthy statements over and over again, they actually hurt the science they are advocating. The UN has said baffling things to such an extent they have hurt the reputation of climate science, resulting in backlash about climate change because no one knows what to believe any more.
Melting Himalayas and other grey literature published as fact can be dismissed as zealotry in an IPCC working group but in the midst of climate warming hysteria - 2005 - the UN itself made some rather silly projections that have come back to haunt them.
The UN and its The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) made a prediction that by 2010 there would be 50 million “climate refugees” by, of all dates, 2010. 2010 may have seemed like a comfortable number in 2005, since Al Gore was saying we were doomed in 10 years back then. They even produced a handy map showing where all of the people forced to leave home due to bad weather would come from.
The map has, not surprisingly, been purged in as many places as the UN can purge it, though plenty of people have looked at census data to see if this climate Exodus occurred and are now making goat noises at the UN over it. GRID-Arendal, an official United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) collaborating center, took it down, saying that graphic and information were produced as an "environmental Atlas" for Le Monde neewspaper and was not meant to be, you know, believed. Oy vey.
But Google is kind enough to cache things on the Internet, so here it is for posterity. You have to click to see it in any meaningful way because it's the whole world:
Obviously a number of climate scientists aren't going to be happy about more fodder for skeptics and outright deniers, but the days of circling the wagons around advocates with agendas is long gone. Climate scientists should have been policing their own and deriding this stuff the same way biologists and physicists would correct (and ridicule) hard science claims about silly speculation.
Exxon could not have spent $100 million dollars and achieved the kind of credibility undermining done by people claiming to be friends of science. Rather than let the UN and its political bodies continue to set back real environmental reform, climate scientists need to create their own body and avoid the IPCC political gerrymandering method of throwing out anyone who disagrees. Get climate science back from politicians and advocates. That would be a great Earth Day present for the world. The environment is too important to let the UN risk by making science look stupid any longer.
- PHYSICAL SCIENCES
- EARTH SCIENCES
- LIFE SCIENCES
- SOCIAL SCIENCES
Subscribe to the newsletter
Stay in touch with the scientific world!
Know Science And Want To Write?
- Your Probiotic Probably Has Gluten
- Mystery Of Morgellons - Disease Or Delusion - Scientific Hypothesis Of Connection With Lyme Disease
- 2nd law of thermodynamics
- Mummy Madness In The Anatomical Record - All Open Access
- Will We Soon Have A 2-D Liquid?
- Highest Energy Collisions ? Not In My Book
- Bang !! 13 TeV - The Highest Energy Ever Achieved By Mankind ?!
- "I investigated it before I hit the 'post' button on my comment. Some articles supported the assertion..."
- "Great Article and useful tip this blog gives people good information. You really mention here some..."
- "Whatever that RT thing is writes that same article every 6 months, and every 6 months someone has..."
- "Here's one good answer to the question of your title: http://rt.com/news/261673-india-gmo..."
- "I'm fine, don't have Morgellons or chronic lyme disease, and thinking about the condition doesn't..."
- Savannahs slow climate change
- Sudden onset of ice loss in Antarctica detected
- Proton therapy has fewer side effects in esophageal cancer patients
- Mood instability common to mental health disorders and associated with poor outcomes
- Depression associated with 5-fold increase in mortality risk for heart failure patients