If you have been paying attention to the climate change world the last week or two, you know that one of the big stories has been the flawed date in the 2007 IPCC report, asserting that the Himalayan glacier could be gone by 2035. Various reports have said that this error was a flip of the year 2350, or that it was taken from an earlier magazine report that was not scientifically peer reviewed, or that it was caught by multiple scientists reviewing the IPCC report before it was published and their notes were ignored. Perhaps all of those have an element of truth- the bottom line is that the assertion is not true and it got published in one of the most influential reports ever produced on climate change- and one that is used by policy-makers to make decisions.

Full text: "Glaciers in the Himalaya are receding faster than in any other part of the world and, if the present rate continues, the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high if the Earth keeps warming at the current rate." –IPCC 2007 Report

Should the man in charge of the report be fired from his position? That question is being thrown around by people, agencies and countries.

Rajendra Pachauri, head of the IPCC panel, said that he would not resign because of the error.

I’m pretty ok with that. One mistake in a thousand pages? Fair enough. It’s been pointed out and everyone knows the truth- so, it should just be filed under the larger scientific process. People figured out that it was incorrect and now we fix it and move on. Because a date was wrong does not mean that climate change science or the macro-meaning of the report are wrong. There are incorrect numbers and statements in text books all the time- not to mention news articles and the sources of information we use to make our daily decisions. Yes the standard is higher for a scientific research report, especially one as important as this, but one error should not mean cutting the neck of the leader.  

"Our procedures are very robust, they are very solid. All we need to make sure about, is the fact that we adhere to implementing these procedures. Rational people ... see the larger the picture. They are not going to be distracted by this one error, which of course is regrettable. I have no intention of resigning from my position," Pachauri said.

He went on to say that he thought there were no other errors in the report: "The possibility is minimal -- if not non-existent. We would be reviewing and strengthening our processes henceforth," he said. Now that part I doubt. If there was one error, why wouldn’t there be a dozen others? It should be continually reviewed, not defended as an aberration not worth attention.

The issue is receiving a lot of attention because government policy decisions are based on the numbers and information in the report.

I think he should stay in his position and the report should be viewed as an authoritative guide that can be formally challenged by anyone who believes they have different information. Yes, including the deniers- every voice should be heard on this one.

Photo Credit: Himalayan Trails (via Flickr under CCL)