Member log in

Science community rallies in face of 'Climategate'

New Zealand scientists have added support to the World Meteorological Organisation’s (WMO) findings that 2009 is likely to be in the top 10 warmest years since 1850.

Rallying in the face of ‘Climategate,’ supporters of the IPCC’s role in mainstream climate science say the results are consistent.

New Zealand Climate Change Research Institute director Professor Martin Manning said it was an important statement from the WMO.

“Given the amount of criticism that has been aimed recently at one of the groups doing careful summaries of temperature data, it shows that our knowledge of the increasing global temperatures is widespread and certainly not reliant on any individual organisation.”

He said it confirmed a preliminary statement from the institute in October that said this decade would be warmer than the last by 0.16 to 0.17 degrees Celsius and that seven of the ten warmest years on record were in this decade.

Those arguing there was a peak in temperatures in the 1990s were not making a balanced interpretation of the data.

“The WMO statement also points out the increasing seriousness of extreme weather around the world. The number of extreme events is increasing and leading to a growing realisation that continuing climate change will bring negative impacts.”

World Meteorological Organisation Commission for Agriculture Meteorology, Jim Salinger, said the WMO showed climate warming continued this year – the fifth warmest year on record and the third lowest summer Artic sea ice on record.

“New Zealand observations are consistent and show continuing increase in New Zealand temperatures over the last few decades, and further loss of the permanent snow and ice in the Southern Alps.”

Principal scientist at NIWA, James Renwick said the state of the global climate this year was only possible to observe since comprehensive satellite and other observing systems became available and monitoring systems should be a top priority for national funding agencies.

“The climate in 2009 show a mix of events, underlining the effects of climate extremes upon humanity, from the Victorian bush fires, to drought in China, and heat waves in Europe and India.

“The climate change signal is clear, with the current decade coming in warmer than the 1990s, which were warmer than the 1980s. Continued monitoring, prediction, and adaptation/preparedness are crucial.”

More by Andrea Deuchrass

Comments and questions
39

News reports are saying that some of the spin scientists are not happy ,as to keep their work they have to lie about the myth of Global Warming ,Go Figure.

The press seems to be the ones rallying to defend climate science. Most geologists, including myself, know that CO2 levels are the lowest in the earth's history; that CO2 levels were much higher during the last glaciation; that temperatures have been warmer than now during recorded history (which is why the Romans had vinyards in England). Most of climate science is based on somewhat dubious temperature data (incluyding the NZ data where I live) which is then statistically computer modelled with thousands of assumptions made by the modellers. The press needs to actually look into the data used to make these models and how it has been "normalized", instead of listening to such experts as Al Gore, inventor of the internet!

umm, perhaps warming would be less if they stopped putting carparks next to the measuring stations. cough Kelburn cough....

Wow, amazing news....is that all one, two or even five of them worried joe publics woken up to the scam.

The news is that most of Joe Public knows about the lies, but few know what to do about it. It seems far more of public rather than the academic world have bothered to do their own research on this one. Tidal waves take time to build, and currently, the warmists control the media. Time will tell...

.01 of a degree in a space of 10 years???? You made us believe that the sea levels were going to rise etc. Stop this scam or We Are Change will confront you here in New Zealand and start suing you as well.

Cold fusion scientist were completely pilloried by the media (cerca 1989) some may remember, yet there was no fraud involved, just an inablity to reconcile extradordinary results with which they went public, against irrefutable theory. Today (2009) there is evidence of ordinary results treated fraudulently to produce some extraordinary phenomenon by climate scientists, which supports what they would have us believe is irrefutable theory (anthropogenic global warming - AGW). We can't have it both ways.

Doesn't seem to have occurred to these 'educated scientists' of climate change paranoia, that nearly all of the gloabl temperature change recorded over the last two hundred years, can be explained by the improved acuracy of the measuring devices. One hundred years ago the best accuracy was about one degree, now temperature an be measured to an accuracy of 100th of a degree..
Food for thought!.

Doesn't seem to have occurred to these 'educated scientists' of climate change paranoia, that nearly all of the gloabl temperature change recorded over the last two hundred years, can be explained by the improved acuracy of the measuring devices. One hundred years ago the best accuracy was about one degree, now temperature an be measured to an accuracy of 100th of a degree..
Food for thought!.

What is a scientist meant to do? He or she will possibly have a mortgage, kids etc and want to keep their job. Only a scientist of independent means can so no. When a bit billy puts the pressure on....

The activists need to understand where a lot of the 'skepticism' is coming from. It is from these same scientists I suspect, just not openly. No one expected the Spanish Inquisition!

A scientist - is meant to be honest and ethical - regardless of financial pressure (or any other pressure for that matter).
Your argument is vile and immoral, for it means the scientists working for the Nazi's did no wrong - they were just protecting their family and mortgage. The scientists need to understand that most of the skepticism is NOT being paid by big oil, and the more you play this dumb line, the angrier people get. As for the spanish inquistion, the warmist's have run their own inquistion for over a decade - and you now want to be (coyly) suprised??? Go look up words like Bigot, Hypocrite, Liar, Fraud, Zealot, "flat earther" - think about how they now apply accurately to most warmists. You white coat liars sound no better than the Nazis whinging at the Nuremberg trials... (Oh it's not fair, that was meant to be in private...) Get some REAL ethics or hand back your qualifications...before they are taken from you...

What is a scientist meant to do? He or she will possibly have a mortgage, kids etc and want to keep their job. Only a scientist of independent means can so no. When a bit billy puts the pressure on....

The activists need to understand where a lot of the 'skepticism' is coming from. It is from these same scientists I suspect, just not openly. No one expected the Spanish Inquisition!

The computer models which the IPCC use for their forecasts (and for "evidence" of the human component) ALL said that temperature would rise by 0.2C this decade.

It now transpires that temps have not risen at all since the turn of the millennium. Dead flat - or a slight cooling.

Now the IPCC wants to talk about the aggregated temperatures for 10 years and compare that with the aggregated temperatures of the previous decade. Why? Because Mt Pinatubo erupted during 1992-93 creating a major cooling effect in those years. Take out the Pintubo effect (as scientists usually do) and this decade was much cooler than the previous one.

The computer models which the IPCC use for their forecasts (and for "evidence" of the human component) ALL said that temperature would rise by 0.2C this decade.

It now transpires that temps have not risen at all since the turn of the millennium. Dead flat - or a slight cooling.

Now the IPCC wants to talk about the aggregated temperatures for 10 years and compare that with the aggregated temperatures of the previous decade. Why? Because Mt Pinatubo erupted during 1992-93 creating a major cooling effect in those years. Take out the Pintubo effect (as scientists usually do) and this decade was much cooler than the previous one.

This is sounding very similar to the 1930's. Only this time the tarrifs imposed is about global warming. As for the science, Man contributes about 0.2% of global carbon dioxide. If that is enough to cause global warming as Gareth Morgan and his fellow believers put forward, then go figure. If governments put increasing restrictions on carbon emissions before a world economy has alternatives, then we are definately heading for another global depression. How are countries going to pay debt when these restrictions decrease the GDP by 10-20%. The world economy is very fragile at present. These people at Copenhagen should pack their bags and go home.

Glad to see so many individuals post that can actually think. MSM is controlled by those who will make money off the scam (or rather, would have made) so it is no wonder why the avg joe is confused. However, the avg joe now has many scientists in the wing that will take the time to logically, and adequately explain what has been done to the data; how masses were fooled via msm, tv, gov, etc.; and, what the earth really does over periods of thousands of years--change climate which renews the face of the planet.

Humans... foolish humans have NO clue as to the actual relationship between life on this planet, the climate etc. to actually be able to make a claim that humans have caused the climate to rise.

Pollute via mercury, aspartame, etc., in our food, water and meds, yes. Warming... eh, I say no based on the fact that what is now a desert, say the middle east, has millions of barrels of oil below it which could have only been laid down by a very wet climate with plant life. What happened? Can anyone say climate change?

There has still not been a sensible explanation provided regarding why the world was warmer and had higher levels of CO2 during the medieval period (approx 1300 - 1500AD) that at present. This is well before the industrial age started to increase CO2 levels. Also, the largest greenhouse gas emitter of all is not in attendance at Copenhagen - mother nature; mankind still emits well less than half of overall CO2 emissions.

This whole fiasco is looking more like becoming another millenium bug problem. I believe that in 20 years many of the pro "mankind caused global warming" nutters will be highly embarassed. Our emissions are adding to the problem, but the problem simply cannot be caused by mankind, particularly when it has happened at least 7 times in the past, prior to the ice ages.

Over 30000 American scientists have signed a petition against the man made global warming hysteria. But the politicians and media try to tell us the science is settled. Gore says the climategate emails are irrelevant because they are 10 years old, but the latest one was 12 November 2009. The emails clearly show the AGW case is a fraud and those involved should be prosecuted. The Global Warming movement is just a dangerous political movement not a scientific one.

Guess were the data, from which the Met Office based it's recent "warmest decade" report come from? Yep you guessed it, that beacon of scientific integrity, the Creative Research Unit, (I'm sorry, the Climate Research Unit) at East Anglia University. Says about all really. Check this out:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6951029.ece

Looks to me like the same scum that was telling the world it was getting warmer didn't believe it himself. What a discrace!

From: Phil Jones
To: John Christy
Subject: This and that
Date: Tue Jul 5 15:51:55 2005

John,
There has been some email traffic in the last few days to a week - quite
a bit really, only a small part about MSU. The main part has been one of
your House subcommittees wanting Mike Mann and others and IPCC
to respond on how they produced their reconstructions and how IPCC
produced their report.
In case you want to look at this see later in the email !

Also this load of rubbish !

This is from an Australian at BMRC (not Neville Nicholls). It began from the attached

article. What an idiot. The scientific community would come down on me in no
uncertain terms if I said the world had cooled from 1998. OK it has but it is only
7 years of data and it isn't statistically significant.

The Australian also alerted me to this blogging ! I think this is the term ! Luckily

I don't live in Australia.

http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=544&filename=1120593115.txt

the only deniers are those of the truth. ask yourselves why NOT $1 has been spent preparing our coastlines for 'sea rises'. why NOT $1 has been spent urgently evacuating our major coastal centres.

what a crock of corruption

Yes it's a sad situation......if the scientists can't agree then where does that leave jo blog? Nevertheless, we shouldn't fall into the trap of shooting (some of ) the messengers. If we are ever going to understand whether we have a problem or not, then it is going to be through the efforts of scientists, not the rantings and ravings of non-scientists, nor for that matter the chairleading of politicians, investment advisors or celebrities. The rhetoric doesn't help.

Thats what is happening with the climate lies, just like the usual suspects Y2K, WMD Iraq,SWINE FLU,now CLIMATE CHANGE, a polite way of putting a mish mash of lies when it should be called CLIMATE RAPE.

I have been following this story from the very beginning when the emails and data were revealed by the whistleblower.

I was one of the first to examine Harry's file, and report on some of his comments. Just search for harry_read_me dot txt and you'll find over 400 posts by me on this.

It has become quite clear that there is clear evidence that the data on climate change, all of it, from the CRU and the other 2x centres, is seriously flawed. Flawed and 'adjusted' conveniently to show an unprecedented temperature rise.
Those who have checked the raw data and looked at the 'adjustments' have shown how the long-term temperature record has been fudged. The latest from WUWT on Darwin airport is a classic example.

Despite the huge political and media campaign to try and convince everyone otherwise, the scam is now exposed.

The good honest scientists who have been persecuted for questioning the validity of this AGW theory can now stand up and be counted. They have a massive amount of evidence to support their concerns. It is time for truth to win over propaganda.

Steve Netwriter

This would infer the whole community is in favour. It is only the ones funded by Big Green" (check the article called "Follow the Money" in the Wall street Journal).

It was much, much warmer during the medieval warming period than it is today.

This is not so complicated

There are Vikings that where buried (interred) in the permafrost in Greenland.
The permafrost was not disturbed since it froze.
It was not frozen when they were buried.
I would call that warmer then today, a lot warmer.

This was hundreds of years before the Industrial Revolution. They tried to hide this.

The ironic thing is that this evidence of the medieval warming period is in a museum in Copenhagen.

The Fate of Greenland's Vikings February 28, 2000 by Dale Mackenzie Brown
www.archaeology.org/online/features/greenland

Also, the medieval warming period was global.

Fraudulent hockey sticks and hidden data
joannenova.com.au/2009/12/fraudulent-hockey-sticks-and-hidden-data

For a satirical look at the climategate computer programming (hiding the decline):
Anthropogenic Global Warming Virus Alert.

www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s5i64103---

just checking to see if this works

It is embarrassing to read the rubbish posted here

The Greenhouse effect exists, is an established fact and is required for life as we know it on this planet. (the effect is an average temperature 32 degrees higher than it would be without it)

CO2 absorbs infrared radiation mainly in the 4.26micron and 14.99micron ranges.

CO2 contributes between 10 and 26 percent to the greenhouse effect depending on the latitude and atmospheric make up at the time of measurement (Water vapor is the largest contribute to the effect but is at much higher concentration in tropical regions)

For the last 800,000 years CO2 has stayed at a concentration of between 170 - 300 ppm. Since the industrial revolution we have increased the concentration to 380ppm. Homo Sapiens have existed as a unique species for 200,000 years.

Feedback effects such as the ability of warmer air to hold more water vapor and ice loss decreasing the albedo of the planet (how much sunlight is initial reflected in back as visible light rather than being absorbed and later released as infra-red) .

The result of this will be average temperature increases, weather pattern changes and sea level rise and the changes will happen at faster rate than normal natural cycles.

The planets ecosystem will be seriously damaged during these changes; but the planet will survive and life will survive. Humans will also survive, our species will not be extinct. But our civilization will undergo massive trauma dealing with the consequences, do we really want to bequeath that to future humanity ?

dennis has cut and pasted his diatribe from the politically biased climate-alarmist sites. Your facts have been disputed by many and are tainted with subjective speculation.

i.e dennis, as a question, given the DOOM you say - WHY are we rushing to economically crush NZ by sending ALL of our money overseas...to some mysterious fund....YET not $1 been invested in evacuation of NZ's major coastal centres for this DOOM?

why has NOT $1 been pumped into flood protection of the same?
why has NOT $1 been invested into wave / sea barriers in auckland, tauranga, wellington, otago, dunedin, invercargill, nelson?

point: IF warming truly exists then solutions should be removed from politics and disaster plans NEED to start today. As shifting Auckland etc to higher ground is as complex as your environmental misunderstandings.

Don't these "bright minds" get it yet? Either they condemn the CRU zealots and their lies, or they say "it's ok" - which then convinces the public that the rest of science must be junk too. You can't keep lying forever - now the truth is out - so this seems like as good a time as any to say "sorry, we'll do better, be more honest". Only complete morons would say "nothing wrong with the global warming science" and pretty soon only morons are going say "Science itself is still credible if these academic twits don't "fess up". The denial is reaching farsical heights. Thankfully, it seems real sciences like physics, computer science, geology, maths, etc, are coming to their senses and may eject the warmists - into the cold, snowy weather outside. Oh - I'd really like to see what HARD data supports the suggestion the Victorian Bushfires contributed any measurable warming to the planet.... That's a funny one!!!!

All of the data that supports New Zealand's position on climate change are sourced from the NIWA (National Institute for Water and Atmospheric Research), who's director is the vice-chair of the UN-sanctioned IPCC. Of COURSE the NIWA going to agree with their own UN-sanctioned WMO.

Remember when the Motley CRU explained away the "trick" and "hide the decline" comments as being taken out of context?

Not so fast, Johnson.

Hero of the free-thinking world, Steve McIntyre, has reconstructed the IPCC, Mann, and Briffa data coverup from combing through the Climategate email. The IPCC instructed the scientists how the data should be modified and presented THEN the scientists created the graphs.

Absolutely mindblowing.

http://climateaudit.org/2009/12/10/ipcc-and-the-trick

NIWA - No idea what's ahead

Check out the Copenhagen Document leaks, this knowledge may save your life! Do what you can with your Government Reps in your country to have these infringements on your life eliminated! You will literally be fighting for your and your family’s existence, Click the videos below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAqqAnUxACY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94KH-WMZuw0

Request that PM Harper doesn't sign the Copenhagen Treaty, thereby causing Canadians to lose their Sovereignty and Freedom, email the PM at: pm@pm.gc.ca

Hey Dennis,
Why do you pick that range of dates?

"For the last 800,000 years CO2 has stayed at a concentration of between 170 - 300 ppm. "

Could it be because it's inconvenient to look a little further back?
How do you explain this then:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v207/neuralnetwriter/GlobalWarming/Climate_Change_Over_Millions_of_Yea.gif

The 1,000, 2,000, 3,000, 4,000, 5,000, 6,000, 7,000 ppm makes your "170 - 300 ppm" look a bit pathetic. Yet during those much higher CO2 times, temperature fluctuated up and down.

There sue doesn't look like any significant connection between CO2 and temperature.

What scientists? I see only two named. Both have been involved in Niwa and its suspect practices. The headline is not supported by the article much like climate alarmist headlines are mostly not supported by the facts. Where are NZ's reputatable scientists?

I don't know the answer, but I am still inclined to go with the vast majority of scientists on this one. I think the email release went a long way to reassure me that they are considering alternative hypotheses, debating them, and genuinely seeking the truth. Their assessment of the truth at this point is anthropogenic global climate change is possible, occurring, and likely to be costly and dangerous for humans.

Yes, there are some scientists who disagree, quite loudly, but they are still in the minority. You frantic raving skeptics are just too scary for me to line up with. Besides, reducing waste, remodelling cities, and ditching reliance on the family car, I think these are good things to do even if there is no climate pressure. You free-market loony conspiracists don't offer a vision of a world I want to live in, you just make me worry about my children speaking to strangers.

And allowing nutters hold the Y2K example up as a 'conspiracy' in support of your example is one thing that really puts me over the edge. Y2K is a great example of collective action and forward planning averting issues, so if you support the idea that Y2K was a 'conspiracy' I'm not ever coming over to your side. And as long as you fail to censure those who put the Y2K example up as evidence in support of your side, I am suspicious that you support that assessment.

So, if you're interested, there's a report back on how well your campaign is running with me.

Cheers and happy holidays

I really find the fundamentalism on both sides of this non-debate quite hard to fathom.

It is obvious that the world has warmed slightly since the 'Little Ice Age' and declined slightly since the 'Medieval Warm Period'. Conclusion: Don't worry about it.

Apocalyptic visions of the near-future are best left to Hollywood or that bloke with a new book out.

The Copehagen treaty / carbon tax solution does appear to be extremely crooked. The impact of this particular pyramid scheme on developing nations will obviously be disastrous.

Perhaps we should focus our attention on good old fashioned environmentalism i.e conservation, clean air, clean water and bio-diversity.

All the Best,
Ken