Legal Defeat for Global Warming in Kiwigate Scandal
By John O'Sullivan
Last Updated Oct 9, 2010, Published Oct 6, 2010
Translation by Autumnson Blog
Fruity Scandal Shocks Kiwis - J. Smith生果醜聞衝擊新西蘭人 - J.史密斯
In the climate controversy dubbed Kiwigate,New Zealand skeptics inflict shock courtroom defeat on climatologists implicated in temperature data fraud.
在氣候爭議中被稱為"奇異門"，新西蘭懷疑論者給震擊的法庭挫敗予在溫度數據欺詐受牽連的氣候學家。
New Zealand’s government via its National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) has announced it has nothing to do with the country’s “official” climate record in what commentators are calling a capitulation from the tainted climate reconstruction. The story is also covered on web news aggregator site, icecap.com.
新西蘭政府通過它的國家水和大氣研究所（NIWA）已宣布，它與該國的“官方”氣候記錄在評論家們所謂的污染氣候重建投降無關。故事亦報導於網站新聞聚合網站 - icecap.com。
NIWA’s statement of defense claims they were never responsible for the national temperature record (NZTR).The climb down is seen as a legal triumph for skeptics of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition (NZCSC) who had initiated their challenge last August when petitioning the high court of New Zealand to invalidate the weather service’s reconstruction of antipodean temperatures. The NZCSC Petition may be read here.
NIWA的辯護聲明聲稱，它們從來沒負責全國溫度記錄（NZTR）。那委曲求全被新西蘭氣候科學聯盟（NZCSC）的懷疑論者視作一項法律的勝利，他們去年8月已發起他們的挑戰向新西蘭高院呈請，以廢除氣象服務的對蹠溫度重建。 NZCSC呈請書可看這裡。
According to the August official statement of the claim from NZCSC, climate scientists cooked the books by using the same alleged ‘trick’ employed by British and American scientists. This involves subtly imposing a warming bias during what is known as the ‘homogenisation’ process that occurs when climate data needs to be adjusted.
The specific charge brought against the Kiwi government was that its climate scientists had taken the raw temperature records of the country and then adjusted them artificially with the result that a steeper warming trend was created than would otherwise exist by examination of the raw data alone.
Indeed, the original Kiwi records show no warming during the 20th century, but after government sponsored climatologists had manipulated the data a warming trend of 1C appeared.
新西蘭政府拋棄'官方'氣候記錄
New Zealand Government Abandons ‘Official’ Climate Record
The NZCSC story reports that the NZ authorities, “formally stated that, in their opinion, they are not required to use the best available information nor to apply the best scientific practices and techniques available at any given time. They don’t think that forms any part of their statutory obligation to pursue “excellence.”
NIWA now denies there was any such thing as an “official” NZ Temperature Record, although there was an official acronym for it (NZTR). However, the position now taken by the NZ government is that all such records are now to be deemed as unofficial and strictly for internal research purposes.
The article urges that if the government will not affirm that their temperature reconstruction is official then, “Nobody else should rely on it.”
來自氣候門大學的研究員在數據詐騙中受牽連
Researcher from Climategate University Implicated in Data Fraud
As reported in a Suite101 article by the same writer of April 2010 'Kiwigate is a Carbon Copy of Climategate' it was shown that the scientist who made the controversial “bold adjustments” is none other than Jim Salinger who is also a lead author for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Because very few temperature records exist for the Pacific Ocean, the NIWA record is given extra weight by the UN’s IPCC for determining multi-decadal trends in global average temperatures.
Salinger was dismissed by NIWA earlier this year for speaking without authorization to the media. The researcher originally worked at Britain’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU), the institution at the center of the Climategate scandal.
Salinger was also among the inner circle of climate scientists whose leaked emails precipitated the original climate controversy in November 2009. In an email (August 4, 2003) to fellow American climate professor, Michael Mann, Salinger stated he was “extremely concerned about academic standards” among climate skeptics.
在它能被獨立核實之前數據已被毀滅
Data Destroyed Before it Could be Independently Verified
In circumstances strangely similar to those witnessed in the Climategate controversy, Kiwigate appears to match Climategate in three key facets. First, climate scientists declined to submit their data for independent analysis. Second, when backed into a corner the scientists claimed their adjustments had been ‘lost’. Third, the raw data itself proves no warming trend.
Downloadable pdf files of letters between Coalition chairman and barrister Barry Brill and NIWA chairman Chris Mace may be read here.
References:
Dunleavy MBE, T.,'High Court asked to invalidate NIWA’s official NZ temperature record,' (August 13,2010); climatescience.org.nz, (accessed online: October 6, 2010)
Atkins, Holm, Joseph & Majurey., [Solicitors],’Statement of Defence on Behalf of the Defendant,’ [On behalf of NIWA], (September 14, 2010)
Costa, A.C. and A. Soares, ‘Homogenization of Climate Data: Review and New Perspectives Using Geostatistics,’ Mathematical Geoscience, Volume 41, Number 3 / April, 2009.
New Zealand Climate Science Coalition, ‘NIWA Challenged to Show Why and How Temperature Records Were Adjusted’ (February 7, 2010), accessed online April 26, 2010.
NZCSC & Climate Science Conversation Group; Press Statement of December 18, 2009; accessed online ( April 26, 2010).
Salinger, J. Climategate email Filename: 1060002347.txt. (August 4, 2003).
http://www.suite101.com/content/legal-defeat-for-global-warming-in-kiwigate-scandal-a294157
沒有留言:
發佈留言