Still not sorry: head of IPCC cleared of fraud allegations, gets apology but denier calls it bullshit

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.

33 thoughts on “Still not sorry: head of IPCC cleared of fraud allegations, gets apology but denier calls it bullshit

  1. JG says:

    Fortunately, the Sunday Times has printed an apology stating:

    Um, that’s be the Sunday Telegraph. You might want to fix this.

  2. I’m not sure that I agree that, “It is going to become increasingly harder for people like North to make their usual allegations in the mainstream press,”
    But I totally agree that “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.”
    Idiots like him are all too common and too bloody sure of their beliefs, regardless of what evidence has been offered to them. I only became aware of this since starting my blog – until then, I thought that most reasonable people could be reached through sensible evidence. Either this is not the case or a larger number of people than I had expected are unreasonable.
    Still, I enjoy providing a rebuttal to ideological nonsense and am happy to give time to critically addressing the writing of loud-mouth ignorant fools. For pointing out Nova and Bolt, I must thank you! 🙂

    • Watching the Deniers says:

      Sometimes, just sometimes I permit myself a little optimism 🙂

      The sad reality is North will continue to peddle is misinformation in the same way the Andrew Bolts and Glenn Becks of the world do.

  3. adelady says:

    “I call the man a liar and I…stand….by…..that.”

    Anybody know any law? Would this count as an aggravation of the original libel, a repetition or as a completely new one.

    It’d be nice if someone could find a way to shut the man up.

    • you’re absolutely correct.
      Funny how the last resort is to legal action and yet North sees this as a weakness! Unlike Monckton’s legal action though, I suspect that there is strong grounds here.

  4. You’re right about North, (I’ve not been aware of Becks) and Nova, Laframboise, etc etc etc.. I suspect that much of their attitude is deeply rooted in human history (superstition/religion and xenophobia/war propaganda) which is a hard thing to change – especially those who seem to hate/fear a changing world (largely outside of their control).. it’s like someone coming into your cosy little house, where you’ve lived happily since childhood, removing all the furniture, knocking out a few walls and adding a few windows – making it a more open, well lit and healthy place to live. It might extend your life, but scares the shit out of some people.
    Fortunately, those who have the power of print to spread their fears are not too out of reach nowadays – the net has given media a new level of personal freelance rebuttal. Of course, the echo chamber happens as well – but I’m optimistic here that people like yourself give clarity a fighting chance against such dogmatic paranoia.

  5. ginckgo says:

    I have to agree with North to some extent that the apology is lame, though not for his reasons. “It was not intended to suggest that Dr Pachauri was corrupt or abusing his position” – of course that was the intention, why else would anyone publish such a vitriolic piece? Unless no-one read it before it went to press, which wouldn’t surprise me. And “embarassment caused”?!? How about potentially destroying his reputation and career! Buch of tossers.

  6. klem says:

    This makes no difference to anyone. Pachauri is still responsible for turning the UN IPCC from a world respected organization into a globally recognized laughing stock. And as long as Pachauri remains the chairman, the IPCC will remain a laughing stock. I hope he keeps his job forever. He makes life for the climate deniers so much easier!

    Cheer up. The climate scare is over. Go home, you lost.

    • JG says:

      The climate scare is over. Go home, you lost.

      What on earth can you mean by this extraordinary statement?

      If you mean the scientific argument has been lost, then you’re right, it has — by the deniers. The science has never seemed more solid, while the strange patterns of weather events this year seem to be offering a foretaste of some truly dire stuff to come. (As the truism has it, you can’t point to a single weather event and say, “That’s global warming,” but once you start getting patterns of weird events, with an increasing frequency of the weirdnesses, then, yes, you can be rightly suspicious that this is what’s going on.)

      If you mean the political argument has been lost, then (a) you must be really quite remarkably stupid to think the physical world pays the remotest attention to political arguments (or do you think the value of pi would have changed to 3 had Nebraska carried the bill declaring it to be so back in whenever?); or (b) you must be paying no attention to contemporary events, because there’s been a marked swing in favour of rationality on the subject of AGW among many politicians around the world, politicians of all stripes, in some part because of the clutch of weather events referred to above; or (c) both.

      If you mean the popular argument has been lost, then refer again to point (a) above: physical reality doesn’t give a tinker’s cuss what popular opinion says . . . or do you think that, if we all voted to disbelieve in gravity, we’d never have to worry about overweight again? (Actually, please don’t answer that question. I have a depressing conviction you might say, “Yes.”) And, again, you’re obviously not paying much attention to the real world, because the pendulum of popular opinion has begun to swing the other way — partly because of the weather events, partly for other reasons, and partly because it is getting through to the public that all the screaming hysterics of the deniers, all their disgusting smears and death threats, all their lies and dishonesties, are being exposed, one after the other, by the postmortems on the Climategate fiasco, by retractions even among the right wing press of articles like the one discussed here that falsely smeared Pachauri, by the investigation and exoneration of Michael Mann, and on and on and on. I imagine you don’t read a lot in case you tire your lips out, but even you must be aware of some of these cases . . . aware, but you choose to ignore them, or to believe that they’re part of some looneytoons conspiracy theory to which you’ve chosen to subscribe.

    • Pachauri is responsible for the smear campaign against him? This is as sensible your final statement.

      • JG says:

        Pachauri is responsible for the smear campaign against him? This is as sensible your final statement.

        Beautifully put!

  7. adelady says:

    Scare? My grandfather told us all that he was never scared during WW1. Good for him. Obviously he survived. And he carried scars on his body and shrapnel in his body for the rest of his life – he was wounded three times.

    He wasn’t a brave young man, he was just oblivious. Being unafraid of danger that’s staring you in the face and blowing up all around you does not protect you.

  8. Mark says:

    Don’t forget Martin Durkin.

  9. J Bowers says:

    What’s really funny is that North has closed off his forum to subscribers only claiming spam problems. After ding-dongs with him at the Guardian’s CIF, cannaman has been taking it to North and his faithful there. Bear in mind that the forum was set up for North and his accolytes to post their comments elsewhere in case of moderation, and to prove that they are being censored.

    What’s North been doing? Deleting cannaman’s posts as spam.

    You couldn’t make it up.

  10. Martin says:

    He still gets a nice salary and benefits from an organisation that gains and loses by IPCC conclusions. This is still known as a ‘conflict of interest’.

    Any other chair of a critically important scientific assessment organisation with such conflicts of interest would have been long gone – often voluntarily.

  11. adelady says:

    Who gets a salary? Let alone a ‘nice salary’.

    I suppose $0.00 is a valid entry in a set of books, but it doesn’t buy a lot in the outside world. It’s a bit hard to have a financial conflict of interest when there’s no ‘financial’ involved.

  12. JG says:

    The problem, moth and adelady, is this: I will bet you good money that, even if Martin checks out the Monbiot piece, he will continue to disseminate the same venomous piece of dishonesty all over the intertubes in the belief that, by broadcasting not just this lie but countless others like it, he is serving some kind of Higher Truth — the “truth” that represents the world as he would like it to be (and perhaps as he thinks God decreed it should be) rather than the world as it actually is.

    I could be wrong, of course.

    If so, perhaps Martin might be good enough to add a comment here to the effect that he now realizes his earlier position was invalid and admonishing me for my cynicism.

    I’m starting to hold my breath . . . now . . .

  13. Sherlock says:

    Dr Rajendra Pachauri was with Thomas Barnett and Carlton Bartels (Cantor Fitzgerald) just prior to 9/11in the Windows to the World restaurant in the Twin Towers discussing Bartels’s carbon emissions patent and how it was related to Barnett’s New Rules Project.

    Pachauri made bids on the Twin Towers steel and it was shipped to his buddies in India and China where he has connections to steel industries specializing in scrap steel.

    Cartels was taken out on 9/11 because he was competing with Chicago’s syndicate around Richard Sandor’s creation at CCX when Barry Soetoro provided him with a $1 million grant while he was at the Joyce Foundation. Carlton Bartels, who was killed on 911, invented and held the patent on a computer-based system for simulated automated carbon trading while at Co2e by putting out a news story for example, in the mainstream media to see what effect it would have on the value of the amount of carbon dioxide put out. On the morning of 911 Carlton Bartels was operating this simulated game and it is alleged his simulation administrator codes were stolen and then the game hacked into taking the game from a simulation to an actual live game.

    Richard Sandor launched the Chicago Climate Exchange, or CCX, in 2003 after getting two research grants from the Chicago-based Joyce Foundation (2000 and 2001). The money went to the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University, in Evanston, Illinois, for Sandor’s pilot program to trade carbon credits.

    Richard Sandor (founder of the CCX, in cahoots with Maurice Strong and Al Gore) set up Climate Exchange plc as a Manx offshore holding company, to manage the various futures exchanges he established, while minimizing official scrutiny. His various operations involve money laundering; insider trading (including weather futures fraud); and protection racketeering using gas emissions (including CO2) as a pretext to monopolize control of international resources and industry, largely on behalf of global custodian bankers. KPMG is Climate Exchange plc’s auditor; BNP Paribas is the company’s principal banker.

    So any audit KPMG did of Rajendra Pachauri financial records of any accountability is utter nonsense; KPMG is directly related in the events of 9/11.

    In the wake of the Climategate scandal, mounting public skepticism, and a weak carbon market, Richard Sandor and the other Climate Exchange plc shareholders (principal shareholder: Invesco) opted to cash out to InterContinentalExchange for approximately $604 million. The Chicago Climate Exchange and its satellite exchanges failed miserably to gain traction in the American market. How abject was the CCX’s failure? Prices for emissions allowances have plummeted from over 7 dollars per metric ton in May 2008 to a current price of 10 cents per metric ton.

    The Carbon Disclosure Project is an independent not-for-profit organization holding the largest database of primary corporate climate change information in the world. It is believed Gordon Brown and Ed Balls set up the Carbon Disclosure Project at 10 Downing Street in December 2000 just prior to 9/11 for the purpose of returning 70 trillion dollars to the City of London.

    Thomas Barnett called 9/11, “The first live snuff film in history.”

    If people fail to grasp the actual economics of global warming/carbon emissions trading you are operating in a black hole of ignorance as to what this is really all about.

    • JG says:

      You’ve got a great imagination, Sherlock. Is what you’re smoking legal? Where can I get some?

    • Tim says:

      So the climate change hoax and 911 truthers are wrapped up in the very same conspiracy? wow – I and I suspect the leaders of this, that intend to create a One World Government are the very same alien’s who convinced the dinosaurs to dig for food, thus giving apparent age?
      I’m sorry, but cannot help but laugh when someone tells me that we’re living in the Age of Enlightenment – sure true scientific investigation has been conceived, however if influential people like Cruise are convinced that Xanu chucked a whole heap of aliens into volcanoes on Earth, large groups of people will believe the most absurd twists to maintain a world age less than 10,000years and nonsense like this, where the 911 terrorist action is coupled with climate science, is taken seriously, well we cannot truly be far from the muddy pools of our ignorant ancestors.
      “If people fail to grasp the actual economics of global warming/carbon emissions trading you are operating in a black hole of ignorance as to what this is really all about.”
      You spin a strange little web here – but do you realise the amount of money in fossil fuels? It’s it far more likely that invested interest would be in maintaining business-as-usual? EVERYTHING is tied into fossil fuels – almost all plastics (most products that surround us) are made from it, without coal, 2008 levels of steel product would require a YEARLY supply of charcoal equivalent to half the Amazon in wood, modern agriculture could not exist without it (plus roughly half the world crops are directly fertilised by natural gas derived fertilisers) not to mention transport of per-capita energy use – we’re up to our nose in black gold and that means big bucks for what has become incredibly wealthy industries.
      The whole carbon trading business is nothing in comparison to the fossil fuel industry and is only a necessary middle-man because we’re too short-sighted to make meaningful shifts away from this addiction to fossil fuels. Oil will peak within the next 5 years, with priced (of pretty much everything) every increasing after that point. Gas might be good for another 50yrs – but it will be increasingly burdened as a crutch for our junky habit, which will probably make it peak sooner. Coal is in greatest supply, but as the other two fade out, with increasing population growth (steel requirements), with short-sighted idiots calling for liquid fuel to be manufactured from coal – it’ll most likely also be on the way out within my life-time.
      I’m afraid that it’s conspiracy theorists who are not only operating in a black hole of ignorance, but are also working towards created unnecessary hardship for future populations.
      If such people spent as much time and energy on something actually productive – such as discussing how we can maintain standard of living while shifting to a more secure energy supply, or getting qualification in a science or engineering and actually assist in new technology for a changing world – we could actually have a bring future. Unfortunately, we’re stuck near the swamp, with too many talking to invisible friends and other discussing hidden enemies and plots to take over the world.

  14. Tim says:

    A few typos, my mistake.
    It’s it far more likely that invested interest would;
    “vested interest”
    mention transport of per-capita energy use
    “transport OR per-capita”
    actually have a bring future
    “BRIGHT future”
    and probably others.

  15. adelady says:

    And people say that climate scientists make unreliable conclusions!

  16. JG says:

    The joy of Sherlock’s post is that I have to give a lecture on science denialism in a few days’ time and was looking around for a piece of especially loony AGW denialism to read out so I can fill a minute or two and get some cheap laughs. And now, o joy . . . I need look no further . . .

  17. Sorry JG… I wasn’t too clear. No Sherlock isn’t Pete – just thought if you were looking for material.

    • JG says:

      Sorry JG… I wasn’t too clear. No Sherlock isn’t Pete – just thought if you were looking for material.

      Thanks for the clarification!Hard to tell the crazies apart, most times. Sherlock seems to link to this — — which is either a postmodernist parody or all the way through crazy and out the other side.

      • Indeed it is.. I guess we should avoid the muddy realms that they occupy.
        At first, I wasn’t sure if Sherlock was having a laugh or serious (it sounded like a parody to me) – but his final statement left me thinking that he may in fact be serious.

      • adelady says:

        Oh. My. Giddy. Aunt.

        I went to that place. And I had a bit of trouble working out whether this was some kind of gaming or spoof or parody site.

        So I read the bios – and I still don’t know.

        ( I suspect that’s because I don’t want to know.)

  18. Utilities are bound by a solar youth purchase obligation as percentage of consumption is prescribed across the nation.
    By adding WtE to the RPS, New York State already calls it Solar Youth.
    How do you see Q4 ending up, just from a range, say
    $0. I don’t have those statistics right in front of me. Les Nelson Thank you, Les. It meant that the work is being carried out by specialist companies who were registered under the micro-generation certification scheme MCS.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: