A lesson for NZ critics of climate science?

In September the NZ High Court is to consider a request by local critics of climate science to get NIWA to change its national temperature record. See A desperate plea to be noticed? and When asses go to law for details.

Michael Mann

Their legal action bears strong similarities with that taken by  Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli against the University of Virginia. He claims he was doing this to investigate fraud in US climate scientist Michael Mann’s research. The local critics had effectively charged NIWA scientists with misconduct or fraud – the manipulation of NZ temperature data by using adjustments which the critics claim were not required (see New Zealand’s denier-gate).

Cuccinelli’s case was effectively a “fishing expedition” as he had no evidence of fraud. The NZ critics similarly have no evidence of scientific misconduct (which of course hasn’t stopped them claiming this to the world).

A failed witch hunt

So perhaps the local plaintiffs should take some lessons from Cuccinelli’s case which the presiding judge has now set aside (see Judge quashes Cuccinelli subpoena of U-Va. records). He ruled that Cuccinelli had failed to state “reasons to believe” that Mann had committed fraud:

“The Court has read with care those pages and understands the controversy regarding Dr. Mann’s work on the issue of global warming. However, it is not clear what he did was misleading, false or fraudulent in obtaining funds from the Commonwealth of Virginia.”

Chances are a similar thing is going to happen in New Zealand.

Mann, of course, was pleased with the ruling in his case. He said:

“I’m very pleased that the judge has ruled in our favor. It is a victory not just for me and the university, but for all scientists who live in fear that they may be subject to a politically-motivated witch hunt when their research findings prove inconvenient to powerful vested interests.

“I’m looking forward now to trying to get back full time to the things I really care about: doing research and extending the forefront of our scientific understanding of the science of climate and climate change, teaching and advising students and postdoctoral scholars, and doing the best I can to communicate to the public important scientific findings.”

Climate desk has an audio of an interview with Michael Mann on this ruling.

Need to Know’s Alison Stewart spoke with Mann about the dangerous precedent the Cucinelli’s case could have set and about what he calls the climate change denial “industry.”

Download the file here.

Thanks to The Fire Judge Sets Aside Virginia Attorney General’s University of Virginia Document Demands

Similar articles

Enhanced by Zemanta

3 responses to “A lesson for NZ critics of climate science?

  1. Mike Johnson

    What about the IAC report, Ken?

    Or is the Team still trying to work out how to spin this disaster?



  2. Mike – I have the report – released today. It is 113 pages long. I have skimmed though the executive summary (18 pages) and read Shapiro’s statement to the press conference.

    It appears to be an excellent report. Identified specific steps for improvement of the IPCC’s work. Professor Martin Manning, who did work for this report (and some of this is included), has made a comment today (reported by SMC). He has some concerns about the practicality of some issues but in general supports it.

    Shapiro makes clear that the committee was not asked to either evaluate the science or leadership of the IPCC. So beware of news reports who imply some sort of judgment of these has taken place. You will be aware that certain blogs and newspapers wouldn’t recognise a truth if they fell over it in this area. Just beware of their reporting.

    So – no disaster – unless you can quite a specific item I have missed?

    Meanwhile, Mike – news of the quashing of the fraud case against Mann preceded this item. I think it is far more relevant to New Zealand. And immediately relevant. What amount are you prepared to bet against a similar discharge here?

    What are you thoughts on that?

    And who the hell is this Team you talk about?


  3. If people are all decended from monkeys then how come there is still sunspot activity?

    (Plus Al Gore is fat.)


Leave a Reply: please be polite to other commenters & no ad hominems.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s