Local blog Imperator Fish has a nice little satirical comment on the impending legal case being taken against NIWA by New Zealand critics of climate change science (see A desperate plea to be noticed?). If They Win is a fictional news report of legal action taken by the Climate Science Coalition (CSC) alleging breach of a court order that ruled climate change was not occurring. That is it assumes the CSC will be successful in its current case.
The CSC sued the Crown Research Institute NIWA over weather data issued by the institute, and obtained a ruling by the court last year that NIWA’s data was invalid.
But the CSC are concerned that global temperatures may have risen, in defiance of the court order.
CSC spokesman Terry Dunleavy said the recent atmospheric activity was concerning.
“It may just be an anomaly, but we would certainly be very concerned if temperatures were on the rise, in defiance of the judge’s order.”
Problem is who is responsible? Who do they sue now?
Auckland University Associate Law Professor Nigel de Blath said it was not absolutely clear who or what was behind the recent temperature changes. But if it was God He may have a case to answer.
“On the face of it He appears to have breached the spirit of the court order, if not the actual express language of it.
“I think we all accepted when the ruling came out last year that climate change was at an end. The judge made his views very clear on the subject.”
Mr de Blath said the latest temperature anomalies made a mockery of the entire judicial process.
I nice little story, illustrating the stupidity of thinking one should take legal action in an attempt to change reality.
Posted in New Zealand, politics, SciBlogs, science, Science and Society
Tagged Climate, climate change, Crown Research Institute, deniers, Environment, global warming, humour, law, New Zealand
You will notice a rash of new science blogs based in New Zealand. Maybe you have already.
This press release explains it all.
The Science Media Centre today launches a major new science communication effort with the arrival of Sciblogs, a network of science blogs covering everything from clinical health to climate change.
Posted in blogging, Blogroll, New Zealand, NZ blog rankings, science, Science and Society
Tagged Auckland, Crown Research Institute, New Zealand, Oceania, Peter Griffin, Science Media Centre, University of Otago, Victoria University
Kim Il Sung giving "on the spot guidance" to collective farmers. When asked the farmers were unclear about his message
One of the biggest complaints of New Zealand scientists working in the Crown Research Institutes is bureaucracy. Or, at least that was the case during my time.
You know – stupid bureaucratic requirements like time sheets. At one stage we were being forced to break our time down to 6 min intervals! I used to say that science is a creative process and this was as silly as getting artists to fill in time sheets. Then we had financial managers, commercial managers, human resources people, communication managers, etc. making extra demands on our time. Creative people forced into an accounting role. Publications having to be vetted for intellectual property (IP) before publication – and sometimes prevented from being published so that IP could be “captured”. “Innovative thinking” and “customer management” courses imposed on researchers. Commercial managers preventing proper communication of science to the public (see the example of Jim Salinger in Clamping down on science communication).
Posted in belief, Bible, communism, creationism, culture, Darwin, diversity, evolution, faith, god, intelligent design, New Zealand, religion, Russia, science, supernatural, superstition
Tagged Christian apologetics, Crown Research Institute, Epistemology, evolution, Kim Il-sung, New Zealand, North Korea, philosophy, scientific method, Scientific theory, Stalinism, Wedge strategy
Climate scientist, Jim Salinger, is scheduled to go into mediation today with his former employer NIWA. He is taking legal action after his shock dismissal three weeks ago (see Clamping down on science communication) .
Some climate change deniers appeared happy over Salinger’s sacking. But it’s important to realise that the dismissal had nothing to do with any climate change controversy. Dr Salinger was sacked because he talked to media organisation without prior approval of the management bureaucracy at NIWA.
Unfortunately, the legal case may be considered solely on the issue of whether or not Salinger violated a “lawful” bureaucratic edict by his employers. I hope this is not the case. Natural justice requires that the whole problem of bureaucratic control of science communication to the public be aired.