| Programme name | Listen | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bridges with Africa | ![]() |
![]() |
|||
| Earth Beat | |
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
| Euro Hit 40 | |
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
| Global Perspective | |
|
![]() |
||
| South Asia Wired | |
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
| The State We're In | |
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
| More >> | |||||
|   | |||||
| Times and frequencies | |||||
Email news bulletin
What's on - Programme Preview
Press Review - of the leading Dutch newspapers every weekday
Media Network
Euro Hit 40 - Europe's No. 1 chart show
I'm disturbed by this statement in the article: "Rather than disappearing by 2035, as IPCC reports claim, the mountain ice would last until 2350, according to the original research underlying the report."
That makes it sound like the error was merely a typo--2035 vs. 2350.
From all I've read, the real problem was that there WAS no original research:
"But the IPCC have since admitted it was based on a report written in a science journal and even the scientist who was the subject of the original story admits it was not based on fact. The article, in the New Scientist, was not even based on a research paper - it evolved from a short telephone interview with the academic. Dr Syed Hasnain, an Indian scientist then based at Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi, said that the claim was "speculation" and was not supported by any formal research."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/7011713/UN-report-on-glaciers...