We now know that "snapshot" wasn't the intent because the "no glaciers in 2025" claim was included even though they knew that it was wrong because they wanted to influence the politics.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1245636/Glacier-scie...
FWIW, while they're trying to distance themselves from the claim, they've kept the immediate author on-payroll. Are they buying him off or protecting their own?
- The scientist that made the glacier claim now works for Pachauri - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherboo...
- A possible motive? "Pachauri ... may have raised millions of dollars for his New Delhi institute on the basis of the totally bogus ‘glaciergate’ claim by the IPCC that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035" http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2010/01/23/ipcc-h... (Walter Russell Mead)
And yet, most of what we hear is that the "deniers" are in it for the money because some of them used to work for the petroleum industry.