Free Markets, Free People


Climaquiddick Expands – New Zealand Data Questioned

Anthony Watts has the story.

The New Zealand Government’s chief climate advisory unit NIWA is under fire for allegedly massaging raw climate data to show a global warming trend that wasn’t there.

The scandal breaks as fears grow worldwide that corruption of climate science is not confined to just Britain’s CRU climate research centre.

The charts explain it quite well. Here’s the NIWA chart:

NZchart1

Notice the relentless rise in temperature depicted on the chart.

Now, here’s the raw data from the temperature stations:

NZchart2

As Watts points out:

Gone is the relentless rising temperature trend, and instead there appears to have been a much smaller growth in warming, consistent with the warming up of the planet after the end of the Little Ice Age in 1850.

The revelations are published today in a news alert from The Climate Science Coalition of NZ:

Straight away you can see there’s no slope—either up or down. The temperatures are remarkably constant way back to the 1850s. Of course, the temperature still varies from year to year, but the trend stays level—statistically insignificant at 0.06°C per century since 1850.

Got that? 0.06°C per century since 1850?! Absolutely statistically insignificant (especially given that 1850 signaled the end of the Little Ice Age) and certainly nothing which supports the dire prediction of the Chicken Little crowd.

Read the entire Watts article. And for some additional reading, try this piece at American Thinker about the programing problems at the University of East Anglica’s CRU. I understood about half (not being a programmer) but it certainly made me understand that there were serious problems with their calculations.

As an aside, I’m going with the “quiddick” suffix vs. the “-gate”. As CR mentioned, “-gate” refers to a story the media will relentlessly pursue while “quiddick” refers to a story the media will do its level best to ignore. I think, given the current “coverage” that it is obvious “quiddick” is more applicable – although I do like another suggestion about a name for the whole AGW movement – “Global Whoring”. Fits.

~McQ

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Tumblr
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

15 Responses to Climaquiddick Expands – New Zealand Data Questioned

  • O

    M

    G

    The fraud that’s apparently been going on in support of AGW is even worse than I suspected.  I figured that people were being selective in what data they used and what they reported, but this is outright fabrication.

    The thing is, the fraud is so widespread and provides such a widely-used framework to explain EVERYTHING from hurricanes to swimming polar bears as “global warming” that people persist in believing that “the science is settled” and even have “evidence” to support their beliefs.

    As I’ve written before, these yahoos should have their degrees revoked, the word “fraud” branded into their foreheads, and a copy of Galileo’s “Dialogue” shoved up their a**es.

  • Thanks for the personal shout-out, Bruce.  ;-)
    As I consider the implications of AGW politics on economies and societies around the world I think this scandal will go well beyond being just a -gate 0r a -quiddick.  Both of those are more silly sideshow than anything else with few lasting effects for most of us.  With AGW, however, I think we are witnessing the emergence of another Nuremberg.  Policies are slated for enactment that will cause massive economic privation, social dislocation and deterioration of living standards.  The result will be destitution and death around the world.  And all will be attributable to a Big Lie hastily adopted as government policy.
    Summon the Godwin Alert…

    • With AGW, however, I think we are witnessing the emergence of another Nuremberg. ”

      AGW is simply a problem, just like Germanys defeat and Versailles was a problem.  It took a political movement to utilise that problem as a reason to invade Poland.  It takes a political movement to utilise AGW.

      “Policies are slated for enactment that will cause massive economic privation, social dislocation and deterioration of living standards.  The result will be destitution and death around the world.”

      Yes, but only due to the solution adopted.  A bunch of socialist politicians (the EU) have proposed socialism through inter-governmental regulation and wealth transfer as the only solution.  Socialism is what socialists always propose as the solution for everything and it always costs a lot, so this really isn’t surprising. 

      And all will be attributable to a Big Lie hastily adopted as government policy.”

      No.  This is not attributable to AGW.  It is attributable in the most part to socialism.  And in part to conservatism being asleep at the wheel in terms of offering a better solution*. 

      * Small government, eliminate income tax & deficit spending and institute a carbon sales tax – simple effective steps to deal with AGW. 

      • Small government, eliminate income tax & deficit spending and institute a carbon sales tax – simple effective steps to deal with AGW.

        Deal with AGW..why? It’s not there, it’s bogus.  Why “deal” with it?

        • “Deal with AGW..why? It’s not there, it’s bogus.  Why “deal” with it?”

          Because I like small government, am against deficit spending and would like to see less money go to the Gulf – climate change can tick all the boxes.  

          Also its not bogus.

  • Adjustment of the temperature record to achieve a desired outcome showing an upward trend gives a whole new meaning to term “man-made” global warming ;-)

  • Isn’t it funny that Erb stormed off of this site because of our “irresponsible” doubts about Global BS.  And now, less than 2 months later, It is revealed as the total scare hoax we knew it was.  Wrong again Erb, but I suppose he is used to that.

  • Absolutely statistically insignificant

    Gaaaahhhh, please cross out that ‘statistically’! The results were statistically significant at 0.06 C. That amount may be tiny, but statistical significance has no bearing on the magnitude.

  • Also, the response from NIWA: http://www.niwa.co.nz/our-science/climate/news/all/niwa-confirms-temperature-rise

    There were stations movements. There is a consistent temperature difference between the two locations, hence the constant differences in the early records.

    • But the NIWA doesn’t (or won’t) reveal the math of their adjustments which they claim were necessarily made. It’s pretty simple – show your work.

      • Yea, those seem to be the reason for the major adjustments, though, which is reasonable. An easy way to end the bickering is to plot only the data which has not had any adjustments to see whether the trend remains — I’m not sure it does. If the constant trend disappears after their removal, they’ll have a lot more to explain.

        Also, I’m going to ask again that you cross out that “statistically” in “Absolutely statistically insignificant” in the third-from-last paragraph. It really reflects badly on the rest of the article.

  • Bruce:
    Your readers may be interested in this update that I provided this update to Wretchard’s post on this NZ  brouhaha over at BC.
    http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2009/11/26/more-agw-controversy/#comment-49