Today, the NZ Herald reported:
Chortle! The real silly thing is that the Climate Science Education "Trust" (CSET) is claiming they're not questioning whether man-made climate change is real, but then follow up with:
So they're arguing that human activities are not responsible for the change in climate... Imagine if the judge actually rules on that. Justice Venning would certainly have reason to do so, being that anthropomorphic climate change has been categorically proven to be a frightening reality. This all just makes Coalition secretary Terry Dunleavy and Chairperson Barry Brill look like complete nutters! A first impression further strengthened when reading some of the letters between CSET lawyers and NIWA.
In effect the Climate Science Education "Trust" (CSET) made an OIA request for information that would show NIWA had manipulated temperature data. NIWA couldn't supply this information because it doesn't exist. Along with various other unfounded accusations, CSET then made an Ombudsman complaint that NIWA had not provided the non-existent information. CSET then claimed that there was no authority to set up the seven weather stations in 2000 that record temperatures around the country, despite government funding. They claim that NIWA scientists had a conflict of interest (without any evidence), and that changes around the weather stations has effected data. CSET then requested that NIWA undertake an internal investigation. NIWA undertook a review, which was dismissed by CSET because it did not show any manipulation or unreliability of weather temperature readings. They then lodged a legal claim that the documented temperature increase of 0.92ºC effectively reduced to zero after excluding "contaminated" weather stations, contradicting their previous acknowledgement that natural warming did occur. CSET then requested that NIWA appoint a sub-committee, or an independent investigator. This request was dismissed by NIWA because the issue was already before the courts.
The problem here is that CSET is wasting NIWA, the Ombudsman and the courts time and therefore our tax money, and because CSET is operating through a trust, there is little hope of recovering costs when their claims are found to be frivolous and to some extent vexatious. It's a tactic that polluting industries often like to employ to undermine climate science... However I expect that this case will simply cast doubt on the sanity of Terry Dunleavy, Barry Brill and the rest of the climate change denier crackpots!
A group of global warming sceptics has accused Niwa of deception over the issue and is calling on the High Court to invalidate its temperature data.
At the High Court in Auckland today, The New Zealand Climate Science Education Trust, a branch of the NZ Climate Science Coalition, challenged national temperature records, saying the method used was unscientific.
Records from the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (Niwa) show a national warming trend of almost 1 degree Celsius in the last century.
The figure, which was almost 50 per cent above the global average for the period, was unreliable, the trust says.
Niwa says it is confident in the integrity of its science.
Chortle! The real silly thing is that the Climate Science Education "Trust" (CSET) is claiming they're not questioning whether man-made climate change is real, but then follow up with:
"Many scientists believe that, although the earth has been in a natural warming phase for the past 150 years, it has not heated as much as Government archives claim. The precise trend figure is extremely important, as it forms the sole basis of the claim that human activities are the dominant cause of the warming."
So they're arguing that human activities are not responsible for the change in climate... Imagine if the judge actually rules on that. Justice Venning would certainly have reason to do so, being that anthropomorphic climate change has been categorically proven to be a frightening reality. This all just makes Coalition secretary Terry Dunleavy and Chairperson Barry Brill look like complete nutters! A first impression further strengthened when reading some of the letters between CSET lawyers and NIWA.
In effect the Climate Science Education "Trust" (CSET) made an OIA request for information that would show NIWA had manipulated temperature data. NIWA couldn't supply this information because it doesn't exist. Along with various other unfounded accusations, CSET then made an Ombudsman complaint that NIWA had not provided the non-existent information. CSET then claimed that there was no authority to set up the seven weather stations in 2000 that record temperatures around the country, despite government funding. They claim that NIWA scientists had a conflict of interest (without any evidence), and that changes around the weather stations has effected data. CSET then requested that NIWA undertake an internal investigation. NIWA undertook a review, which was dismissed by CSET because it did not show any manipulation or unreliability of weather temperature readings. They then lodged a legal claim that the documented temperature increase of 0.92ºC effectively reduced to zero after excluding "contaminated" weather stations, contradicting their previous acknowledgement that natural warming did occur. CSET then requested that NIWA appoint a sub-committee, or an independent investigator. This request was dismissed by NIWA because the issue was already before the courts.
The problem here is that CSET is wasting NIWA, the Ombudsman and the courts time and therefore our tax money, and because CSET is operating through a trust, there is little hope of recovering costs when their claims are found to be frivolous and to some extent vexatious. It's a tactic that polluting industries often like to employ to undermine climate science... However I expect that this case will simply cast doubt on the sanity of Terry Dunleavy, Barry Brill and the rest of the climate change denier crackpots!
 |
| Climate Change denier Terry Dunleavy |
