Posted 7 February 2010

"NIWA did everything they possibly could to help us, except hand over the adjustments. It has turned out that there was actually nothing more they could have done -- because they never had the adjustments.... None of the scientific papers that NIWA cited in their impressive-sounding press releases contained the actual adjustments....The main objective of our temperature study was not to show that the raw data has been tampered with, even though that opinion was emphasised and cannot yet be excluded. Our objective was achieved upon Tim Mahood’s admission on 29 January that 'NIWA does not hold copies of the original worksheets.'"  Richard Treadgold recalls the history of the challenge to NIWA about how it adjusted past temperature records.

LINK 

Posted 7 February 2010

"The IPCC – the body widely regarded, until now, as the ultimate authority on climate science – is looking worse and worse. After it was forced to retract its claim about melting glaciers, Mr. Pachauri dismissed the error as a one-off. But other IPCC claims have turned out to be just as groundless."  Margaret Wente, writing in The Globe and Mail, Canada.

LINK  

Posted 7 February 2010

"Science is the search for truth, the never-ending path towards finding out how things are arranged in this world so that they can work as they do. That search is never finished. It seems that the climate research community has betrayed that mighty goal in science. They have substituted the search for truth with an attempt at proving one point of view. " Open Letter to the scientific community by Petyr Chylek, distinguished American clima=rte scientist.

LINK 

Posted 4 February 2010

New ZEaland's National Institute for Water & Atmospheric Research (NIWA) has been requested under the Official Information Act to provide details relating to treatment of raw temperature data. The trexts of the correspondence exchanged can be accessed in the links below.

To download pdf:  LINK 

NIIWA'S response: to download pdf:  LINK 

 Coalition's further letter to NIWA: to download pdf: LINK 

Posted 3 February 2010

"They made the science fit the political goals and stopped at nothing to achieve the end. They succeeded, because beyond manipulations that duped politicians, media and most of the public, they knew many scientists who participated did not understand climate science. Blinded by career ambitions and large funding they ignored what was going on or lacked the expertise to know."  Professor Timothy Ball in Canada Free Press.

LINK  

Posted 2 February 2010

"The IPCC made a prominent claim in its 2007 report, again citing the WWF as its authority, that climate change could endanger "up to 40 per cent" of the Amazon rainforest – as iconic to warmists as those Himalayan glaciers and polar bears. This WWF report, it turned out, was co-authored by Andy Rowell, an anti-smoking and food safety campaigner who has worked for WWF and Greenpeace, and contributed pieces to Britain's two most committed environmentalist newspapers. Rowell and his co-author claimed their findings were based on an article in Nature. But the focus of that piece, it emerges, was not global warming at all but the effects of logging." Christopher Booker, in UK Daily Telegraph.

LINK