Consensus = Fraud

[westwall]

olfraud loves to talk about the "consensus" of all the worlds scientists when it comes to the warming of the planet. Here is a case where the consensus was possible only through fraud....and they got caught. There are many links to follow, if you so choose, but the underlying article shows how NIWA fabricated and adjusted the temperature record to follow the "consensus".


Climate Science Coalition Vindicated | Scoop News

 

[Old Rocks]

LOL. Sure, Walleyes, sure. And what do the National Academies of Sciences of all the industrial nations state? How about all the Scientific Societies in the world? The major Universities of the world?

Oh, I forgot, you have proof that they are all in a giant Commie backed conspriracy supported by Islamofascists, front by the Beatlebug group, and all of them thar other pointy head librul pinkos.

 

[westwall]

LOL. Sure, Walleyes, sure. And what do the National Academies of Sciences of all the industrial nations state? How about all the Scientific Societies in the world? The major Universities of the world?

Oh, I forgot, you have proof that they are all in a giant Commie backed conspriracy supported by Islamofascists, front by the Beatlebug group, and all of them thar other pointy head librul pinkos.

Well olfraud the individuals behind the "consensus" in New Zealand (and firm supporters of AGW all) committed fraud and were caught. New Zealand seems to be bucking the "world trend" and has seen no appreciable rise in temperatures for many years. Care to explain that or will you just fall back on the old "my priest says it's so so it must be" mantra? And for the record I am the one laughing at you.

 

[Old Rocks]

According to that blog.

 

[elvis]

According to that blog.

which contradicts the hundreds of environut blogs you have cited.

 

[westwall]

According to that blog.

What's the matter boyo, afraid to follow the links?

Here is a round of the hearings for you.

http://www.youtube.com/user/inthehousenz#p/u/2/Roku_QeiE3s

 

[Old Rocks]

WELLINGTON: New Zealand's glaciers are melting away, according to an annual survey of the snowline on 50 glaciers in the South Island, the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) announced on Monday.

They have lost half of their snow and ice over the last 30 years, scientist Jordy Hendrikx said, confirming that the glaciers again lost much more ice than they gained in the 12 months ending March at the end of the Southern Hemisphere summer.

He said this was mainly due to above-normal temperatures and average rainfall over the Southern Alps during the previous winter combined with above-normal sunshine and well below normal precipitation during late summer.



Read more: New Zealand glaciers melting away: Survey - The Times of India New Zealand glaciers melting away: Survey - The Times of India

 

[Old Rocks]

From the Royal Society of New Zealand. Not some blogger, but a group of real scientists.

Science, Climate Change and Integrity Science, Climate Change and Integrity News Royal Society of New Zealand

From a philosophical point of view, none of these lines of evidence “proves” the theory of AGW. However, by the same token, Joseph Lister did not “prove” that antiseptic surgery practices prevent sepsis; he only demonstrated that their use gave rise to vastly fewer deaths from post-surgery sepsis. The adoption of these practices came about not because a theory was “proved”, but because medical practitioners had the common sense to realize that he was very likely right. A more fundamental understanding of his ideas came about only when the microbial nature of disease was fully revealed.

This “precautionary principle” applies equally to climate change. Science has not “proved” beyond all reasonable doubt that human activities are changing the climate, but it has clearly shown that there are multiple lines of evidence all pointing in the same direction, and that this view is supported by theories that are well-founded in fundamental sciences like physics.

 

[Old Rocks]

According to that blog.

which contradicts the hundreds of environut blogs you have cited.

Oh ya, them dumb bloggers at Science, Nature, and the Journal of Geophysical Science.

 

[westwall]

From the Royal Society of New Zealand. Not some blogger, but a group of real scientists.

Science, Climate Change and Integrity Science, Climate Change and Integrity News Royal Society of New Zealand

From a philosophical point of view, none of these lines of evidence “proves” the theory of AGW. However, by the same token, Joseph Lister did not “prove” that antiseptic surgery practices prevent sepsis; he only demonstrated that their use gave rise to vastly fewer deaths from post-surgery sepsis. The adoption of these practices came about not because a theory was “proved”, but because medical practitioners had the common sense to realize that he was very likely right. A more fundamental understanding of his ideas came about only when the microbial nature of disease was fully revealed.

This “precautionary principle” applies equally to climate change. Science has not “proved” beyond all reasonable doubt that human activities are changing the climate, but it has clearly shown that there are multiple lines of evidence all pointing in the same direction, and that this view is supported by theories that are well-founded in fundamental sciences like physics.

From your link

"In recent months, the science of climate change has been subject to harsh criticisms in the popular media, with even more critical comments circulating in the anonymous medium of the internet.

This commentary has quickly escalated into attacks on the integrity and professionalism of scientists themselves, usually in circumstances where they are unable to defend themselves, or unwilling to make themselves the target of personal abuse. Some prominent climate scientists have even received threats of violence against them or their families.

This situation is to be deplored because it carries all the hallmarks of our pre-scientific past when political, religious and military power dictated what was deemed to be the truth, and is the very antithesis of a modern rational society applying accepted scientific methods. It is not necessary to belabour the human atrocities that such times engendered."


And yesterday they admitted that they had commmitted fraud. Yesterday they invalidated your whole point. Yesterday your side was proven unequivocally to have lied and falsified data to further their political goal.

Yesterday you lost!