Comments on: Incredible sham from NIWA

By: Richard Treadgold

Richard Treadgold — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 03:18:20 +0000

Clarence,
Yes, they do — well, nobody else does, unless it’s the Auditor-General. The longer they delay, the worse their tattered reputation becomes in the eyes of the public.

By: Clarence

Clarence — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 01:47:07 +0000

The NIWA chairman has responded, saying his Board doesn’t want to discuss any internal enquiry into the antics of the climate scientists: http://nzclimatescience.net/images/mace.reply2.pdf

NIWA has had ample opportunity to respond to this blog’s allegations of lies and deception in an area of key importance. They have preferred to go to ground, which is close to being an admission of guilt.

So, if the Board now knows that their staff lied, don’t they have a responsibility to take action?

By: Ron

Ron — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 22:10:15 +0000

The forthcoming election campaign could be an opportunity to extract facts and highlight the issue. National presumably just want to remove it from the agenda, hoping that people don’t notice and the MSM won’t push them on it! As Pielke Jr said, the NZ ETS is a folly and debacle.

By: Mike Jowsey

Mike Jowsey — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 13:34:54 +0000

We are eagerly waiting for your earnest and honest response, but not holding our CO2-laden breath…..

By: Mike Jowsey

Mike Jowsey — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 13:30:31 +0000

Hear hear!

By: Richard Treadgold

Richard Treadgold — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 09:09:41 +0000

Hello Mike Palin,

I believe this condition is referred to as “projection”.

NIWA said they would use the careful procedures specified in R&S. But they did not. The defects we found and documented in our paper include comparing sites up to 1100 km apart, instead of only neighbouring ones; using asymmetric periods instead of symmetrical ones; annual data, when R&S is specific about requiring monthly data, and other flaws of a serious enough nature as to demolish any confidence in the new New Zealand temperature record. They overstated the NZ warming by 168%!

So I have three questions for you:

1. Could the demonstrated failure to follow so many (nine or more) of the R&S methods arise in professional scientists from accident or incompetence or only by deliberate decision?

2. Could the purpose of the failures, if deliberate, be to serve scientific truth or only to further the scientists’ organisation’s (or their) own ends?

3. Do you agree that my description of those scientists as “venal, self-interested and short-sighted” is justified by the demonstrated defects alone, regardless of whether I’ve engaged in “projection”?

When I compared them with “the rest of us”, I was, as Mike Jowsey correctly infers, expressing humility and also, it must be said, a sense of disappointment that at least this group of modern scientists has publicly departed from erstwhile dependable standards of integrity.

I’m wondering how you justify their behaviour to yourself, in your own heart. That you do justify it is clear from your only question, which criticises me and which analyses neither our report nor NIWA’s actions. Get serious.

Cheers.

By: Mike Jowsey

Mike Jowsey — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 07:31:18 +0000

Richard T, that would be (my bad).

By: Mike Jowsey

Mike Jowsey — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 07:24:40 +0000

Mr. Palin,
Please cite a specific example to support your “projection” hypothesis.

It appears to me that Richard C’s opinion was self-effacing when he added “the rest of us”. It was a humble addition. It was a moderating addition. It was the opposite of “venal, self-interested and short-sighted”, which I think underscored his point rather elegantly.

So, to underscore my challenge to your rather arrogant (imho) assertion of projection: Please quote Richard C being, in your humble opinion, “venal, self-interested and short-sighted”.

By: Mike Palin

Mike Palin — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 06:56:09 +0000

“…as venal, self-interested and short-sighted as the rest of us.”

I believe this condition is referred to as “projection”.

By: Niche Modeling » NIWA’s Station Temperature Adjustments – CCG Audit

Sun, 28 Aug 2011 04:02:07 +0000

[...] Conversation Group have released their report and reanalysis of the NIWA 7-Station Review. CCG claim NIWA misrepresented the statistical techniques it used in order to fabricate strong warming over [...]