英和和英

固有名詞

Glaciergate

1. A 2010 controversy resulting from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change mistakenly claiming in a 2007 report that the glaciers of the Himalayas would melt by 2035. [from 2010]
   • 2010 January 23, Christopher Booker, “Pachauri: the real story behind the Glaciergate scandal”, in Tony Gallagher, editor, The Daily Telegraph‎^[1], London: Telegraph Media Group, →ISSN, →OCLC, archived from the original on 2023-07-14:

     But no one, it seems, is more embarrassed by "Glaciergate" than Dr Pachauri himself, whose expanding worldwide business connections since he became chairman of the IPCC have recently been the subject of articles in these pages by Dr North and myself.

   • 2010 January 24, Robin McKie, “Glaciergate was a blunder, but it’s the sceptics who dissemble”, in The Observer‎^[2], London: Guardian News & Media, →ISSN, →OCLC, archived from the original on 2022-11-08:

     And don't forget that this mistake was highlighted not by deniers but by scientists themselves. Glaciergate actually shows we can police ourselves, say researchers.

   • 2011 December 7, Michael McCarthy, “Glaciergate part II: climate chief reheats Himalayas row”, in The Independent‎^[3], London: Independent Digital News & Media Ltd, →ISSN, archived from the original on 2022-07-08:

     Asked if he had any regrets over "Glaciergate", he [Rajendra Pachauri] said: "Well, we obviously made an error which we have corrected, and it's there on the website of the IPCC. We did that as soon as it came to our attention."

   • [2015 May 27, Chris Mooney, “Climate change could shrink Mount Everest’s glaciers by 70 percent, study finds”, in The Washington Post‎^[4], Washington, D.C.: The Washington Post Company, →ISSN, →OCLC, archived from the original on 2022-12-03:

     In a 2007 report, the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change alarmingly stated that the mountain glaciers of the Himalayan region could be gone by the year 2035. But the statement turned out to be in error, leading to an IPCC acknowledgement of inadequate vetting of the material and many criticisms of the climate science body — as well as the dubbing of the incident "Glaciergate."]