So a geography student’s chats with Alpine mountain guides formed part of the basis of a supposedly authoritative international report about the effects of climate change on glaciers.
If the science is rock-solid, why go beyond it in the claims that are being made? (It’s not the first time recently that IPCC science has been criticised.)
The quotes in this article suggest that the glacier theories were sexed up in order to build political will and grab newspaper column inches.
If this is the only way to prod politicians into doing something about an impending catastrophe (and they haven’t yet), then what’s the problem?
Or should the scientists ditch the spin and just report the science?
Are stories like this undermining the efforts to tackle climate change?