For anybody curious about context on this, and the IPCC's response: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/jan/20/ipcc-himalayan-glaciers-mistake https://

For anybody curious about context on this, and the IPCC's response: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/jan/20/ipcc-himalayan-glaciers-mistake https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/jan/20/ipcc-him... > In a statement (pdf), the IPCC said the paragraph "refers to poorly substantiated estimates of rate of recession and date for the disappearance of Himalayan glaciers. In drafting the paragraph in question, the clear and well-established standards of evidence, required by the IPCC procedures, were not applied properly." > It added: "The IPCC regrets the poor application of well-established IPCC procedures in this instance." But the statement calls for no action beyond stating a need for absolute adherence to IPCC quality control processes. "We reaffirm our strong commitment to ensuring this level of performance," the statement said.