Response to NIWA comment on de Freitas reanalysis of the NZ temperature record

• Guest post •

— by Barry Brill, Chairman of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition

This note offers brief replies to specific aspects of a Comment by NIWA scientists (called hereafter “NIWA Comment”), published in Environmental Modeling & Assessment in April, 2018, concerning A Reanalysis of Long-Term Surface Air Temperature Trends in New Zealand (by de Freitas et al., 2015) (“de Freitas”).

  1. Abstract

Since there was a systematic tendency for the seven-station sites to be relocated to colder locations as the early half of the twentieth century progressed, [de Freitas’s alleged] rejection of valid adjustments produces an artificially low rate of warming.

Reply

The NIWA Comment is mistaken. Continue Reading →

Diligent academic sacked for dissent

Peter Ridd and Jennifer Marohasy in Sydney last November during a presentation on quality assurance in science.

Professor Peter Ridd has just been fired from James Cook University, Queensland, for speaking out about misleading science concerning the Great Barrier Reef. He needs a lot of support. He is not the only one.

If your heart beats, strengthen it with a donation to a freedom-loving brother. Fight for freedom now before it’s gone.

Continue Reading →

CCG in Australia

I was in Bendigo last week with my wife, Ann, to celebrate a daughter’s nuptials. Now we’re in Melbourne for a few days with the happy couple, back to NZ on Wednesday. Out of touch a bit, but watching the emails. Off to the Victoria Market in a few minutes. Nice place but cold, wet and windy on Friday.

Did the Royal Society prove that we cause dangerous global warming?

Well, no

On April 7 (as you can read in my previous post) I wrote to Dr Julie Maxton, Executive Director of the Royal Society, London, asking a simple question:

I’ve been hunting for evidence for several years without success and now I’m thinking that the Royal Society will surely not let me down. I do hope you can provide a succinct answer. By what mechanism do our emissions cause dangerous global warming?

Shortly afterwards a reply arrived from her Executive Assistant: Continue Reading →

Green Utopia

 

Ten years ago, Tom Scott captured this vision of the consequences of Left-Green tyranny. Today, they continue on that backward-looking path, abetted by a compliant Labour Party through an electoral accident that Winston Peters exploited to circumvent the democratic vote and put the Greens and Labour into the same bed. What a pity Peters wasn’t thinking of the national good.

They banned oil exploration, but why? Was it because of global warming? Well, since it hasn’t been warming, what would you say? I say it’s because oil riches threaten us with extraordinary prosperity—which means freedom for everyone. But they don’t trust us with freedom. National does.

PS: The likeness of the ploughwoman to our Helen is astounding.

Click the heading if you wish to access the comment form.

Complaint over TVNZ inaccuracy, imbalance on oil & gas ban

The Complaints Committee,
Television New Zealand
One News, 12 April: Oil & Gas Exploration Ban

Both news readers in this programme claimed that the purpose of the Government’s ban on new offshore exploration for oil and gas was to cut New Zealand’s greenhouse emissions and was necessary because New Zealand signed up to the Paris Climate Agreement. Continue Reading →

Royal Society answers my inquiry

On April 7 I wrote to Dr Julie Maxton, Executive Director of the Royal Society, London, saying:

I’ve been hunting for evidence for several years without success and now I’m thinking that the Royal Society will surely not let me down. I do hope you can provide a succinct answer.

By what mechanism do our emissions cause dangerous global warming?

With enormous gratitude,

Continue Reading →

Kiwi Royal Society fails to produce climate evidence

The Royal Society of New Zealand (RSNZ) cannot substantiate their claim that mankind is causing dangerous global warming. The NZ Climate Science Coalition (NZCSC) have just spent months pursuing them for evidence, which they failed to produce. We believe that it does not exist. Continue Reading →

Climate brevity: RSNZ don’t know the science of climate change

But first, Business opportunities in climate change

Liam Dann reports:

Climate change real or imagined is driving massive business change. A risk-management expert told him that the impact of climate change is real whether you believe the science or not. Most people, including those at senior levels of business and government, do believe the science, which means the world is going to be shifting to a lower carbon economy.
Continue Reading →

Climate game over?

— By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

Judge Alsup, in the California global warming trial, has accepted the amicus curiae brief from my eight distinguished colleagues and me. The brief now becomes an official part of the court documents. The judge may yet ask all parties to respond to it. Continue Reading →

Clear the courtroom

A stunning victory in California, as Judge Alsup declines to validate global warming alarmism and delivers a big thumbs-up to the sceptics. A principal plank of the plaintiffs was that the oil companies had conspired to “cover up” global warming science; the judge said the plaintiffs showed “nothing of the sort”. The case is not over.

BOOM! Federal Judge Dismisses Claim Of A Conspiracy To Suppress Global Warming Science

Well done Christopher Monckton for a last-minute assist.

Continue Reading →

The elementary error of physics that caused the global warming scare

They said the science was settled. Well, it wasn’t.

— By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

This will be a long posting, but it will not be found uninteresting.

Global warming on trial: Global warming goes on trial at 8.00 am this Wednesday, 21 March 2018, in Court 8 on the 19th floor of the Federal Building at 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco. Court 8 is the largest of the courtrooms in the Federal District Court of Northern California. They’re clearly expecting a crowd. The 8 am start, rather than the usual 10 am, is because the judge in the case is an early bird. Continue Reading →

Letter to the Editor

Tomorrow’s Grim, Green, Global Masters

quill pen

7th March 2018

 

Greens hate individual freedom and private property. They dream of a centralised, unelected global government, financed by taxes on developed nations and controlled by all the tentacles of the UN. No longer is real pollution of our environment the main Green concern. The key slogan of the Green religion is “sustainable development,” with them defining what is sustainable. Continue Reading →

Ill-informed claims of hiatus warming

Well-disinformed comments here prompt a repost from a valuable source of good sense: Matt Ridley. His blog post, Whatever happened to global warming? was published in the Wall Street Journal in September, 2014. Its lessons remain eminently digestible and they deserve to bat for another spell—metaphors that are indeed well mixed. Continue Reading →

Reprehensible display by Renwick

Professor James Renwick

Just two weeks ago Dr James Renwick published an article in The Spinoff provocatively titled Slaying the zombie memes in that ‘climate sceptic’ column on Stuff. Dr Doug Edmeades had posed some perfectly sensible questions to the science behind the claims of dangerous anthropogenic global warming (DAGW), yet Dr Renwick apparently gave them little thought, slating him as presenting “zombie memes”—using a shallow warmster meme himself to denigrate his colleague. It’s amazing what he does next. Continue Reading →

Did humans cause 2017’s extreme weather events?

— by Barry Brill, Chairman of the NZ Climate Science Coalition

2017 was a year of extreme weather, especially in the USA with Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria devastating swathes of the country, while western states suffered from a severe drought and consequent bushfires. The year ended with a record-breaking “deep freeze”.

New Zealand also had its weather travails, with NIWA reporting a “marine heatwave”, bringing rainfall records, accompanied by heavy flooding, to parts of the South Island.

Some elements of the media hold the view that such events are a product of Climate Change. They contend that anthropogenic global warming (AGW) has already become “dangerous”.

Continue Reading →

Was climate change a lucky escape from lack of warming?

For a long time the common name for the greatest challenge of our generation was “global warming” — in fact, it must have been twenty years or more. We all knew what it was and groaned every time the boring old subject was raised.

Then, maybe a decade or so back, just when people were starting to notice that warming had hit some speed restriction, the name seemed to morph into “climate change”. This was a new name and suddenly climate change was the bogyman. Then, of course, it was all on for young and old — every darn piece of weather was being caused by man-made “climate change”. Continue Reading →

What IPCC scientists actually say

True science — I mean confessions

The Summary for Policy Makers (SPM) for each IPCC report is written by bureaucrats and politicians for people who cannot follow scientific language. It is not authoritative, frequently misrepresents the science and is always written before the longer scientific report is finished. If the SPM is challenged, one must resort to the WG1 report, written by scientists. What do the scientists say?

We present here, from the AR4 (2007) (pdf, 106.9 MB) and AR5 (2013) (pdf, 375 MB) reports, a selection of passages that speak against extremist climate change forecasts widely circulated by activists. They are not much referred to by warmsters but they should be widely known, especially by those spending our hard-earned taxes. Dip into these facts — discover the real science and prepare to be amazed by the discord between the claims of the warmsters and the sober consideration of scientists (emphasis added). Continue Reading →

Site traffic is great

A non-trivial audience

 

I’ll try to post this once a month or so, keep you in touch with the real size of the CCG’s audience.

Hail, O audience!

UPDATE 6 FEB

These traffic figures have suddenly reduced themselves, and I think I know why. Only the number of visits has changed, the number of unique visitors has changed only minutely. For example, peak visits on 18 December is now 2232, when two weeks ago it was over 7000, but visitors number 743, when previously they were  almost the same at 739. I changed a setting a few days ago that now counts every visitor with over 50 visits in a day as a robot; so it eliminates their visits. I would guess one robot could easily account for up to 1000 page requests, as there are over 1000 posts, so losing 5000 visits might mean there were about five unidentified robots. Most robots are identified by a regularly updated database but it’s not infallible. The change means that more than 50 genuine page requests in a day by a real visitor aren’t counted in the statistics, but it’s the best we can do. I had to let you know of the change, and anyway daily average visits of 1400 is pretty impressive (over 42,000 visits a month). So thanks! You make the striving worthwhile.

Red/Blue teams to battle on climate

Or will they?

• Guest post •

— by Gary Kerkin

Not long after the Trump administration appointed Scott Pruitt to head the EPA, Pruitt suggested a Red Team/Blue Team debate on climate science—a format in which two teams debate the pros and cons of a proposition. The Blue Team would be composed of scientists supporting the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) hypothesis; the Red Team would be made up of scientists who skeptical of the hypothesis. Continue Reading →

Lancet blasted for ‘sacrificing the poor’

The GWPF gives us a blockbusting new report from Mikko Paunio, an adjunct professor in general epidemiology at the University of Helsinki. Professor Paunio blasts the Lancet for a “gross distortion” of public health science. What follows is the Executive Summary (emphasis added). You can get the full paper here (pdf, 30 pp, 986 KB). – RT

The Lancet, one of the world’s leading medical journals, recently published two long commissioned reports, timed to coincide with 23rd Conference of Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the third UN Environment Assembly. The journal’s aim was to boost climate change mitigation and enhance a ‘Pollution-free World’ initiative in the name of public health. This paper gives examples of the biased, misleading and false health-based arguments that are made in these reports. Continue Reading →

On climate nightmares, daft sea level predictions and reason

Climate nightmare

The story of dangerous anthropogenic global warming is painted as a delicate jigsaw. Diverse enigmatic elements mysteriously combine through uncaring human activity to destroy the planet, preventing which is called “the greatest challenge of our generation.”

At root, however, the story is simple; it’s painted as complex to baffle us. At root, our constant carbon dioxide emissions increasingly heat the atmosphere. But we observe that carbon dioxide does not keep heating the atmosphere, which is demonstrably not warming very much and, debunking the warmsters story, this is the coldest period in the last 65 million years, and for the last 420,000 years, natural temperature changes controlled CO2 levels. There has never been runaway warming.

Continue Reading →

Farming versus Nature

A majestic view of the biosphere and of oneself.

Who does it better?

Can we really improve on nature? Is it remotely possible for us to reproduce her elegant mysteries or achieve her breathtaking biological efficiencies, or is our greatest work a crude parody?

Dr Kelli Archie, climate change lecturer, VUW.

In an article in yesterday’s Herald, Resistance is fertile in battle for our climate, (a Dr Who reference — hilarious!) Dr Kelli Archie (right, evincing a fine enthusiasm in the face of an imminent global calamity) makes a case for reducing our meat intake for the sake of climate control. The concept that anthropogenic climate change might be dangerous is sheer madness, so I recommend the term ‘climate control’ when the focus is humanity’s culpability, to emphasize its foolishness. Continue Reading →

Greenpeace gets a prod

Greenpeace, hate speech and legitimate oil production.

Greenpeace helped out James “Climate Change” Shaw the other day with a press release of impeccable logic pointing out that tackling climate change is incompatible with looking for more oil. Impeccable, that is, on their assumptions. In truth, their reasoning is of the worst falsified kind, twisted beyond reality, there being no evidence that our emissions of carbon dioxide do anything but good for humanity and the planet. Continue Reading →

A climate denier? Ha ha ha!

Climate Science 101: that tiny Sun heats this whole gigantic Earth and that little moon.

Oh, I’m no denier, I just have a few questions. But first…

I’ve been called a “climate denier” hundreds of times because I lie about global warming, ignore unfavourable reports, obscure the truth and all this is funded by big oil. For over ten years I’ve apparently bamboozled the public by introducing doubt where no doubt exists, stirring up needless arguments over climate science that’s already settled, I’ve delayed crucial emissions policies and killed millions of people by allowing global warming, so I certainly deserve prison after all this and maybe a death sentence as well. Continue Reading →

Unpacking climate alarm

Auckland Harbour – little change

The Prime Minister says combating climate change will be the defining characteristic of her term of office. Ms Ardern sees this question as being more urgent than all other economic, environmental and social issues – even the alleviation of child poverty, to which she is headily committed. How did this topic gain this ascendancy? Continue Reading →

TVNZ climate science halfwits

A pristine blue sky ruined by carbon dioxide pollution

The Oxford Dictionary of Chemistry says of carbon dioxide (CO2) that it is “a colourless, odourless gas.” It’s non-toxic except in very high concentrations, it’s essential food for all terrestrial and marine plants and therefore makes all animal life possible, and its level in our blood regulates breathing. From it, plants create the oxygen that we and animals need to survive and its carbon component provides the basis of our anatomy and physiology. Continue Reading →

TV One sinks into climate swamp – Friday

CLOUDS – water vapour (think steam); non-polluting, non-toxic, form on micro-particles, make fantastic animals and shapes

• Guest post •

— by John McLean

TV One managed to plumb new intellectual depths last Friday when it tried to associate photo-chemical smog and micro-particle emissions in urban areas with carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. It frequently displayed images of real air pollution. Continue Reading →

TVNZ’s medley of climate nonsense – Thursday

Drought — the big dry

• Guest post •

— by John McLean

TV One’s great “climate change” campaign continued last Thursday, featuring a medley of nonsense about “extreme events” and New Zealand’s future scorching temperatures before sounding off about Donald Trump’s foolishness in withdrawing the USA from the Paris Climate Agreement. As we have come to expect, TVNZ was wrong on each point. Continue Reading →

GWPF Newsletter 6 Nov 2017

Open in your browser  

GWPF Newsletter 06/11/17

Climate Sceptics Are Winning The Debate

Ipsos MORI:

British Public Increasingly Unconcerned About Climate Change

Ipsos MORI say that they’ve found a steady decline on concern about climate change since 2005, from 82% to 60%, something they describe as a “worrying trend”. —Climate Scepticism, 1 November 2017

 

Just in time for Polar Bear Week, the Global Warming Policy Foundation has published a new resource for cooling the polar bear spin. A paper by zoologist Dr Susan Crockford sets out the truth about the long-term improvement in the conservation status of polar bears. As global leaders meet in Bonn for COP23 (6–17 November 2017), it’s time to celebrate the proven resilience of polar bears to their ever-changing Arctic environment. —Global Warming Policy Foundation, 6 November 2017

Continue Reading →

GWPF Newsletter 5 Nov 2017

Open in your browser  

GWPF Newsletter 04/11/17

Will Climate Change Controversy Bring Down Angela Merkel?

Climate & Energy Wars Shake Germany’s Political Order

When it comes to climate change, there are worlds apart between Germany’s aspiring Jamaica Coalition partners. It is all about coal and it is not certain the divide can be bridged. No other subject in the exploratory talks about a possible ‘Jamaica’ coalition government in Berlin is as controversial as the subject of climate protection. If they do not catch up quickly, ‘Jamaica’ itself will be threatened by “dark doldrums”.  And then all bets are off. —Augsburger Allgemeine, 4 November 2017

Continue Reading →

Fiji’s ‘sinking’ Vunidogoloa Village – victim of AGW or Paris climate handout?

 

h/t WUWT

• Guest post •

— by Barry Brill, Chairman of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition

The popular press has dubbed this remote Fijian settlement the world’s first community to be forced to migrate by climate-caused rising seas. But is it true? Continue Reading →

TVNZ, you are telling porkies

• Guest post •

— by John McLean

Beyond a joke — this must stop!

It’s Tuesday evening and TV One isn’t improving. This time it claims that climate refugees will be leaving Kiribati due to rising seas, caused by man-made climate change, and heading to New Zealand where, surprisingly, the new government is preparing to issue ‘climate refugee’ visas. Continue Reading →

TV One says climate change, facts say otherwise

• Guest post •

— by John McLean

Vunidogoloa, Fiji

TV One is emphasising climate change this week and demonstrating just how bad the media can be.  It’s not clear if it’s incompetent journalists or incompetent climate advisors but it makes a mockery of the idea that TV One tells the whole story accurately and honestly. Continue Reading →

Dunedin descendants threatened with Blenheim lifestyle

• Guest post •

— by Barry Brill, Chairman of the NZ Climate Science Coalition

The Royal Society’s Human Health Impacts report forecasts that average air temperatures in New Zealand could rise by between 2.5°C and 5.0°C by the year 2100 – a mean of 3.75°C.

Let’s take an actual example. Continue Reading →

Climate Health Impacts for Dummies

There are important things to say about the NZ Royal Society’s deceptive and alarmist report on human health impacts from climate change, released last month.

The eight-page report sets out the strongest available case for New Zealanders to be fearful of dangerous anthropogenic global warming (DAGW). But we don’t find the case at all strong or at all scary – so we hope everybody will read and understand it. Continue Reading →

Climate bombshell — NZ has not warmed for 19 years

The data say one thing

[CORRECTION 1 Nov 2017 1945 NZDT: The original post used annual data. Figures for the standard error at 19 and 20 years have been removed until I can redo them using monthly data. The trends are unaffected. RT]

[CORRECTION 2 Nov 2017 1605 NZDT: There have been numerous changes to align this post with a Coalition submission to the Royal Society. There are minor changes, references to error margins and to the 20-year chart have been binned and the title changed to “… not warmed for 19 years”. RT]

For the national temperature record, the 7SS, NIWA have collected the data, checked it, adjusted it, approved it and published it on their website, so they can scarcely now argue with it. But, on the other hand, it’s totally at odds with what they say in public. Note to MSM: this ought to be front-page news.

NIWA say another

Continue Reading →

When it is dangerous to be right

Guest opinion: Dr. Tim Ball

Clipped from: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/10/15/collapse-of-global-warming-deception-triggers-variety-of-bailouts-and-revisionism/ 

We will see an increasing number of people changing their positions on global warming as the global warming ship sinks. It will take various forms including; articles appearing that subtly shift previously held positions; reevaluation of data; or finding new evidence that allows a change and perhaps worst of all those who say they knew the science was wrong all along but did not consider it important to speak out; dredging up a sentence or two from their writings that they claim showed they knew. The level of inventiveness will astonish as rats desert the sinking ship.  Continue Reading →