Kiwi-gate, the final chapter

New Zealand’s Climate Science Coalition has issued a press release detailing the end of the Kiwi-gate affair.

The outcome is that data published in 2009 by New Zealand’s National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) entitled  ‘Are we feeling warmer yet’ has been abandoned and replaced with real, unadjusted data that shows a picture that warmists don’t want you to see:

NIWA makes the huge admission that New Zealand has experienced hardly any warming during the last half-century. For all their talk about warming, for all their rushed invention of the “Eleven-Station Series” to prove warming, this new series shows that no warming has occurred here since about 1960. Almost all the warming took place from 1940-60, when the IPCC says that the effect of CO2 concentrations was trivial. Indeed, global temperatures were falling during that period.

The dishonesty behind the original data was in the adjustments, of course:

Almost all of the 34 adjustments made by Dr Jim Salinger to the 7SS have been abandoned, along with his version of the comparative station methodology.

When the Climate Science Coalition announced its intention to sue, the green establishment rushed to NIWA’s defence:

University of Otago pro-vice chancellor of sciences Keith Hunter has also backed Niwa, saying taking court action against it was “stupid,” while the Environmental Defence Society (EDS) said it may join court action in support of Niwa.  “On the face of it, it’s hard to see how the issue can properly be brought before the court,” said EDS chairman Gary Taylor. “We have no doubts that the science behind global warming predictions is robust and reliable and would wish to support the institute in any way that we can.”

How do you prefer your crow Mr. Taylor?

That NIWA was forced to correct their temperature records to reveal no warming when the initial report was crafted to support the warmist narrative is significant.  The Climategate affair was damning in its revelations of peer-review process corruption and bullying but the establishment whitewashed the truth with ‘investigations’ to give Phil Jones et al cover.  Not so with Kiwigate, where NIWA admitted it could not support its own data in a statement of defence.

The correction of the record is a good win for the Climate Science Coalition and for science in general.

[ad#insert-large]

33 thoughts on “Kiwi-gate, the final chapter”

  1. “Salinger doesn’t feel critics’ heat”

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/waikato-times/news/3575763/Salinger-doesn-t-feel-critics-heat

    “No, I’m not worried, because my research is based on facts, and I reach conclusions,” the 62-year-old says confidently.

    He says that if temperature records showed a “cooling off over the last 10 years, I’d be saying so”.

    He emits a slight chuckle when sceptics such as Hide and the Climate Science Coalition are mentioned: “Science is about facts, not beliefs. I like to look at the facts and see what they say – if people want to attack me as a person, that has nothing to do with my science. It doesn’t worry me.”

    He believes the critics are driven by agendas: “You can actually trace links with quite a few of them back to the oil industry.”

    “This whole group are trying to accuse me, and my overseas scientific colleagues, of fraud,” he continues.

    “Well, there is going to have to be a hell of a lot of people involved in this `fraud’ … They’re trying to say the International Panel On Climate Change is a fraudulent activity, and in fact it’s a very thorough process.”

    Even during last year’s Climategate email scandal, Salinger, a lead author on the IPCC’s report’s New Zealand section, was not concerned.

    The seizing of University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit emails was, he argues, “an illegal activity”, and critics went on to “pick out quotes out of context”, selectively releasing one or two comments.

    “I think it was a deliberate attempt to discredit the science and the scientists,” he says. “Just think – the oil industry has huge amount of money, and a lot of these groups trace to the (political) right-wing in the US.”

  2. “Salinger doesn’t feel critics’ heat”

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/waikato-times/news/3575763/Salinger-doesn-t-feel-critics-heat

    “No, I’m not worried, because my research is based on facts, and I reach conclusions,” the 62-year-old says confidently.

    He says that if temperature records showed a “cooling off over the last 10 years, I’d be saying so”.

    He emits a slight chuckle when sceptics such as Hide and the Climate Science Coalition are mentioned: “Science is about facts, not beliefs. I like to look at the facts and see what they say – if people want to attack me as a person, that has nothing to do with my science. It doesn’t worry me.”

    He believes the critics are driven by agendas: “You can actually trace links with quite a few of them back to the oil industry.”

    “This whole group are trying to accuse me, and my overseas scientific colleagues, of fraud,” he continues.

    “Well, there is going to have to be a hell of a lot of people involved in this `fraud’ … They’re trying to say the International Panel On Climate Change is a fraudulent activity, and in fact it’s a very thorough process.”

    Even during last year’s Climategate email scandal, Salinger, a lead author on the IPCC’s report’s New Zealand section, was not concerned.

    The seizing of University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit emails was, he argues, “an illegal activity”, and critics went on to “pick out quotes out of context”, selectively releasing one or two comments.

    “I think it was a deliberate attempt to discredit the science and the scientists,” he says. “Just think – the oil industry has huge amount of money, and a lot of these groups trace to the (political) right-wing in the US.”

  3. Fake global warming, yet another violation of our rights. Add it to the list of gov’t violations of our right:
    They violate the 1st Amendment by placing protesters in cages, banning books like “America Deceived II” and censoring the internet.
    They violate the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns.
    They violate the 4th and 5th Amendment by molesting airline passengers.
    They violate the entire Constitution by starting undeclared wars for foreign countries.
    Impeach Obama and sweep out the Congress, except Ron Paul.
    (Last link of Banned Book):
    America Deceived II (book)

  4. Fake global warming, yet another violation of our rights. Add it to the list of gov’t violations of our right:
    They violate the 1st Amendment by placing protesters in cages, banning books like “America Deceived II” and censoring the internet.
    They violate the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns.
    They violate the 4th and 5th Amendment by molesting airline passengers.
    They violate the entire Constitution by starting undeclared wars for foreign countries.
    Impeach Obama and sweep out the Congress, except Ron Paul.
    (Last link of Banned Book):
    America Deceived II (book)

  5. This is indeed good news for science and truth. Let us hope that NZ’s example spurs others to do the same.

  6. This is indeed good news for science and truth. Let us hope that NZ’s example spurs others to do the same.

  7. Crikey. Denialists have finally jumped the shark on this one. Have you all got so corrupted by false assertions, lies, misdirections and spin that you just believe anything now that anybody says, no matter how obviously divorced from reality, as long as it supports what you want to believe? Black is black and white is white and believing the featherbrained, breatkingly stupid garbage in this article, and those previous to it is just plain barking irresponsible.

    1. Nick,
      Despite your best efforts to obscure the inconvenient truth with name calling, the fact remains that NIWA was forced to correct the record. You don’t have to like it, in fact I understand that such events are difficult for those who fell for the AGW hoax to swallow but in this case even those you hurry to support are unable to defend themselves.

      As warmists everywhere are discovering, not everything said in the pursuit of the global warming agenda is/was true, or accurate. Which is why this blog exists.

      That and laughing at hippies.

  8. Crikey. Denialists have finally jumped the shark on this one. Have you all got so corrupted by false assertions, lies, misdirections and spin that you just believe anything now that anybody says, no matter how obviously divorced from reality, as long as it supports what you want to believe? Black is black and white is white and believing the featherbrained, breatkingly stupid garbage in this article, and those previous to it is just plain barking irresponsible.

    1. Nick,
      Despite your best efforts to obscure the inconvenient truth with name calling, the fact remains that NIWA was forced to correct the record. You don’t have to like it, in fact I understand that such events are difficult for those who fell for the AGW hoax to swallow but in this case even those you hurry to support are unable to defend themselves.

      As warmists everywhere are discovering, not everything said in the pursuit of the global warming agenda is/was true, or accurate. Which is why this blog exists.

      That and laughing at hippies.

  9. !!!!!!!!!!!!!@ NICK !!!!!!!!!!

    Well Nick I hate to poke at you since you obviously suffer from some sort of deficiency, however I would like to point out to you that in fact Black is not Black and White is not White. Inded they only appear so to our Human eyesight. The truth is that things which appear Black do so because they reflect no visible portion of the light spectrum that we can detect and things which appear white do so because they reflect the entire portion of the visible light spectrum that we can detect. This is why Grass “appears” Green to us. The structure of what makes up the blades of grass reflect the Green waves in the light spectrum. So you need a new cliche to fall back on. Or you could just fall on your sword now and get it over with.

    Just saying

    Merry Christmas to all and to all a good fight

  10. !!!!!!!!!!!!!@ NICK !!!!!!!!!!

    Well Nick I hate to poke at you since you obviously suffer from some sort of deficiency, however I would like to point out to you that in fact Black is not Black and White is not White. Inded they only appear so to our Human eyesight. The truth is that things which appear Black do so because they reflect no visible portion of the light spectrum that we can detect and things which appear white do so because they reflect the entire portion of the visible light spectrum that we can detect. This is why Grass “appears” Green to us. The structure of what makes up the blades of grass reflect the Green waves in the light spectrum. So you need a new cliche to fall back on. Or you could just fall on your sword now and get it over with.

    Just saying

    Merry Christmas to all and to all a good fight

  11. Blimey Nuckelhedd – 10 out of 10 for self knowledge when you chose your on-screen name. Very appropriate. God knows what point you were trying to make with your sophomoric attempt at being clever. The “science” was Ok but it literally meant nothing, so what was the point?

    As you were too dense to see what I meant, I will spell it out to you. This website exists to, amongst others, push the Goebbels’esque big lie that global warming/climate science is all a huge hoax and conspiracy. In order to do that the participants have to indulge in such mentally twisted false logic, source their info from blatant disinformation websites, jump to so many inappropriate conclusions and focus microscopically on the splinters in climate science’s eye while ignoring the beams (nay, giant redwoods) in their own, that they metaphorically are forced to argue that black is white. Which it isn’t. Geddit?

    The whole thrust of the Kiwigate story is that the figures were all wrong and they’ve had to be redone. The breathtakingly stupid line that these articles are plugging is that that automatically means that the warming trend is all wrong, that therefore we cannot be warming the climate – climate science is all a crock – it’s a plot to install a socialist world government – and other paranoid garbage etc etc.

    Here is a link to the new figures superimposed on top of the old figures. Minuscule differences – no real change in the temperature trend whatsoever and yet you are bigging it up as some sort of smoking gun “gate”. Christ almighty, you sneer at hippies on this blog but I never met one whose brain was so acid fried that they would form the same astonishingly cracked conclusions from clear evidence which simply does not support your position

    Unless you lot are mentally ill, you seem to think that what you call “scepticism” is like someone who points out the tiny small mole on the face of a beautiful supermodel and screams out that the mole is proof that she is horrendously ugly – and her whole family too.

    Having looked at the “about” part of this blog it’s crystal clear that you get your highly distorted information about science from disinformation websites like Wattsupwitthat and possibly wing nut organisations like Cato institute, S.E.P.P, Heartland etc

    1. Nick,
      If I understand your point correctly – you choose to believe the 100+ corrections that NIWA reversed (all exaggerating temperatures to create a false warming trend) is no big deal because it was only a matter of a few points of a degree, yet you argue on the other hand that warming of a few tenths of a degree is enough to cause all the scary problems so beloved of the warming movement. Mental gymnastics, how very clever. I was particularly impressed with this:

      Christ almighty, you sneer at hippies on this blog but I never met one whose brain was so acid fried that they would form the same astonishingly cracked conclusions from clear evidence which simply does not support your position

      Just a small correction, we laugh at hippies rather than sneer. Laughing upsets them more and is therefore even funnier. It’s a comedy thing, you won’t get it.

      FYI – for the Goebbel’s reference you forfeit debating points under Godwin’s Law but the good news is that the blog needs a resident angry-all-the-time troll and your credentials are excellent. If you promise not to actually bust a blood vessel and cause yourself harm, the position is yours. Before you decide whether to accept this huge honor, I offer full disclosure and admit that I once received a 5 cents per liter discount on 100 liters of gas, so I’m totally funded by Big Oil.

  12. Easy there big fella. Apparently I misjudged your ability to consume useless facts and see sarcasm. My bad. No harm intended. And yes I chose my SN simply because I know I am not always correct and it is a fun way to poke at myself and give others an opportunity to slice away if they will. Those who don’t Either have no sense of humor or are to serious to bother. Either way I don’t mind.
    Yes I do “geddit” and am happy to assist in any way I might. I hoped my first foray in here might generate a response and I was not disappointed. I thank you for your lesson on what this site is and what you do in the forums here. I do hope you don’t take all I said to heart. You just happened to be the first post I read that I could take the other side on.
    I do so like the devil and all of his advocates.

    Hope to cross swords with you again in the future sir. 🙂

  13. Hey Bayonet – it’s worth having a look at this “movie review” slice of satire if you like pointed humour (comments are pretty good too – featuring yours truly…)

    As far as your 100+ corrections revised downwards go, this is all about a set of temperature records going back over 100 years from seven separate locations. Sounds like there were many tens/hundreds of thousands of pieces of data that had no correction necessary in the revision. Looks like counting the hairs on the facial mole of the supermodel to me!

    Just looking at the graph that I linked to before – revised records superimposed on previous ones – it seems obvious that there were also a number of corrections in the other direction too where the previous recorded temperatures were too low – presumably you don’t like to mention these because it ruins the cherrypicking for the rhetoric?

    The whole kerfuffle was only about the seven station series. Perhaps this link – the eleven station series might be helpful to put some perspective on things. These data never needed to be adjusted because of changes of circumstances over time yet they still show a robust trend upwards.

    Some people get confused by the short term trends due to weather, El Nino, solar variation etc. If these were stock market graphs the long term increase in company value is clear although, from day to day and year to year and decade to decade, there is always a lot of volatility in the price movements. The overall effect is of a company doing increasingly well and growing – similarly, a climate increasingly warming. Rather like standing on the beach watching the waves crashing on the shore and retreating, if one pays attention to short term trends one would get very confused about whether the tide was coming in or not. The broken wave going back might go back twenty feet whereas the tide coming in during that time was a couple of inches but it’s the long term effects of the tide coming in that will eventually drown you, not the waves.

    Pointing out a past high in the temperature record decades ago and comparing it to a current temperature and thereby deducing that there has been no warming is just not correct. Half an hour ago a freak wave came 60 feet up the beach and reached the point the more ordinary waves are reaching now. Does this mean that the tide has not come in over the last hour? I think not.

    The full NZ climate data is easily available here

    You wrote:
    FYI – for the Goebbel’s reference you forfeit debating points under Godwin’s Law

    Actually, it’s about time Godwins’ law was superseded. References to a clear, national level, aberration of thought processes in the pursuit of a political ideology, and the well documented manipulative techniques that the Nazis used to achieve their ends, is a globally useful metaphor when someone spots the same tactics being employed again. The use of “Godwin’s law” as a disparaging rhetorical technique to downplay the validity of a metaphor sometimes says things about the veracity, or comprehension of reality, of the person invoking it.

    1. Good job you posted this link, your previous comment had been flagged by the spam filter. I caught it this time, but in future please note that anything with more than one link is usually toast.

  14. Cranks are always immune to facts and denialists are cranks at heart. The difference in the corrected graph is tiny and yet the cranks must claim it was huge and also disproves warming entirely. The lengths they will go to are endless. Lie after lie is taken at face value even after it is shown to be a lie. False stories, like this one, don’t get retracted.

    Don’t even claim to be interested in the truth if you can’t admit this whole story is overblown.

    1. JTK,
      Congratulations on repeating the new name-calling protocol demanded by Mark Hertsgaard.

      You may not like it, but even NIWA could not defend their own data. Yet you know better. So please provide a link to the source which proves this story false.
      Everything else you wrote is simply angry name-calling, which in the real world does not count as research.

      The people you need to be angry with are the scientists who fake or manipulate data to enhance the warming narrative, not the people who point to their wrong-doing. If your theory about warming is so robust it should stand on its own. That it cannot should be something to make you stop and think about what you believe versus what can be proved, replicated and demonstrated.

Comments are closed.