Rajendra Pachauri, the head of the IPCC has been subject to horrendous smear campaign by the denial movement.
In December of last year the UKs Sunday Telegraph published a story that alleged Pachauri was personally profiting from his role. The allegations spread through the denial blog-o-sphere like wild fire, and it become canonical “fact” that Pachauri was “corrupt”.
However, as always the reality is very different…
UK journalist George Monboit explains:
In December, the Sunday Telegraph carried a long and prominent feature written by Christopher Booker and Richard North, titled: Questions over business deals of UN climate change guru Dr Rajendra Pachauri.
The subtitle alleged that Pachauri has been “making a fortune from his links with ‘carbon trading’ companies”. The article maintained that the money made by Pachauri while working for other organisations “must run into millions of dollars”.
It described his outside interests as “highly lucrative commercial jobs”. It proposed that these payments caused a “conflict of interest” with his IPCC role. It also complained that we don’t know “how much we all pay him” as chairman of the IPCC.
It is well known that Pachauri does not receive a salary from the IPCC, a fact that could have been easily checked.
More importantly, the accounting firm KPMG audited Mr. Pachauri’s accounts and found no evidence of fraud:
Based on a review of personal financial records of Dr. Pachauri and other records of TERI provided to us for the period 1 April 2008 to 31 December 2009, we did not come across any evidence that either suggests any unexplained receipts and disbursals in Dr. Pachauri’s personal books of account or inappropriate recording of expenses/incomes pertaining to Dr. Pachauri’s advisory services in the books of account of TERI. No evidence was found that indicated personal fiduciary benefits accruing to Dr. Pachauri from his various advisory roles that would have led to a conflict of interest.
Fortunately, the Sunday Telegraph has printed an apology stating:
On 20 December 2009 we published an article about Dr Pachauri and his business interests. It was not intended to suggest that Dr Pachauri was corrupt or abusing his position as head of the IPCC and we accept KPMG found Dr Pachauri had not made “millions of dollars” in recent years. We apologise to Dr Pachauri for any embarrassment caused.
At this point we can dismiss any claims that Pachauri is a “fraud”.
Another white wash?
Gosh, what an enormously large conspiracy this must be!
Richard North goes off the deep end…
The journalist primarily responsible for this smear campaign is Richard North, a man well known in the UK for his “scepticism” of climate change. He also runs a nasty little blog called EU Referendum where he takes regular swipes at scientists, the IPCC and anyone who would dare suggest climate change is real.
However his response to the Sunday Telegraph apology – the one that retracts his story – is amusing.
North has gone into an apoplectic rage:
As far as the paper goes, however, it is actually a non-apology – as a careful study of the words will reveal to anyone with a modicum of intelligence (a dwindling band, one fears).
Actually, the meaning of the apology is unambiguous. Still, North simply cannot admit any fault:
Booker and I might have intended to do so, and I certainly did on this blog – and more. I called the man a liar, and stand by that. But we are not the paper. And it is the paper that is taking the rap as the publisher.
He then works himself up into a frenzy:
So, the paper ends up making two statements of fact, on which basis it then “apologises” to Pachauri “for any embarrassment caused,” an anodyne phrasing that does not even admit to having caused any embarrassment. This is pure, meaningless bullshit.
Which version of the English language are you speaking Richard? Because to my eyes that looks like very much like an apology.
I can just see North frothing at the mouth, pounding the key board with barely contained rage.
In the end North can’t but help continue to make the same tired, discredited allegations:
In the meantime, Pachauri, his claque and the warmist fellow-travellers will be making hay. But if that is what they need to do to “prove” their case and protect their man, it tells you all you need to know about them. My only regret is that the lawyers are claiming about two hundred times more for stitching up the paper than I was paid for the piece. That should also tell you something.
It is going to become increasingly harder for people like North to make their usual allegations in the mainstream press, given that their recent track record so abysmal.
However, North’s rant demonstrates just how petty, vindictive and angry these people are. They will never admit a mistake, nor back down from their absurd claims.
What small souls they have.