Trivialize climate data at our own peril

The jury is still out on Rajendra K. Pachauri. The embattled head of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been cleared of charges that the agency received funds from private companies. But Pachauri has to wait until autumn sheds the toxic leaves that are threatening to poison his IPCC tree.

Pachauri has faced attacks, many of them blatantly racist, from every possible corner of the globe. But let's be clear, if Pachauri deserved the bouquets for IPCC's good work, he has to accept the brickbats for its failures and lapses, too. There can be no excuse for the IPCC's flawed report saying the Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035. Nor can the manipulation of climate change data, as suggested by leaked e-mails of University of East Anglia scientists, be defended.

But the question is: Why didn't climate skeptics have the insight and counterdata to question the IPCC's findings on Himalayan glaciers and trivial other facts? The fact is that almost all IPCC data is indisputable.