IPCC Caught Lying Again—This Time on Amazon Rain Forest

A new study, funded by NASA, contradicts IPCC claims that up to 40% of Amazon rainforest tree growth could be destroyed by even a small reduction in rainfall. Following the exposure of faked claims regarding Himalayan glaciers, coral reef destruction, and the entire historical temperature record, the NASA study pounds yet another silver spike into the heart of the International Panel on Climate Change vampire.

The IPCC claim was based on a year 2000 report by the World Wildlife Fund, a genocide-promoting group founded in 1961 by Sir Julian Huxley with backing from Britain's Prince Philip and Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands.

The NASA-funded study, led by an expert on climate and vegetation at Boston University, examined the effects of the major 2005 drought in the Amazon, when rainfall fell to the lowest level in living memory. The lead author of the study, Dr. Arindam Samanta, is cited by the Daily Telegraph saying: "We found no big differences in the greenness levels of these forests between drought and non-drought years."

The IPCC's 2007 assessment on climate had stated: "Up to 50% of the Amazonian forests could react drastically to even a slight reduction in precipitation.... It is more probable that forests will be replaced by ecosystems that have more resistance to multiple stresses caused by temperature increase, droughts and fires, such as tropical savannahs."

Dr. Jose Marengo, a climate scientists with the Brazilian National Institute for Space Research and a member of the IPCC said: The way the WWF report calculated this 40% was totally wrong. The new study, published in Geophysical Research Letters, used satellite data to arrive at its conclusions.