THE United Nations' expert panel on climate change is facing fresh criticism over its citing of a student's thesis and a mountaineering magazine as evidence that ice is disappearing from the world's mountains.
The latest attack on the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) comes after it admitted that its claim that Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035 was not based on peer-reviewed science.
It also comes amid a campaign by climate change sceptics to undermine acceptance of IPCC science in a bid to stop the passage of proposed legislation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Australia and the US.
The most recent criticism of the IPCC stems from one line in a table in a 938-page ''working group'' report published in 2007, which cites two sources that found there has been a reduction in mountain ice in the Andes, Alps and Africa between 1900 and 2000.
The first source is the equivalent of a master's degree thesis by a geography student at a Swiss university; the second an article published in the magazine Climbing News. Both quote several anecdotal reports by mountaineers.
Some researchers have expressed concern that the use of non-scientific literature - while allowed by the IPCC in certain circumstances - suggested it placed too much weight on unsubstantiated claims.
Richard Tol, an expert in environmental economics and IPCC author, said: ''It is quite astounding. Although there have probably been no policy decisions made on the basis of this, it is illustrative of how sloppy [the authors have] been.''
But other scientists said that a separate IPCC working group report had cited many peer-reviewed studies that found mountain glaciers and snow cover had declined.
Monash University professor Neville Nichols, a lead IPCC author, said the conclusion that alpine glaciers were retreating almost everywhere was based on well-documented studies.
He urged people to look at the core messages in the IPCC's primary documents - the Synthesis Report and Summary for Policy Makers.
''The IPCC isn't above criticism, but it would be good if everyone focused on the messages in those documents and tear them apart if they are wrong,'' he said.
''I don't think they are - they have been argued and debated for a long, long time to make sure we have the most balanced message we can get.''
* With SUNDAY TELEGRAPH
Email a friend