Alex Reichmuth, Die Weltwoche, 22 July 2010: In November 2009, just days before the big climate summit in Copenhagen, thousands of internal e-mails from leading climate researchers at the University of East Anglia were made public. In the e-mails, the researchers at the university's Climatic Research Unit discussed how to manipulate data series. They discussed with colleagues from other research centres how to sideline critics of mainstream climate science. And they requested each other to delete scientific data in order to protect the scientific information from the clutches of their critics. The affair - soon referred to as "Climategate" - was explosive because the IPCC, in its reports, had again and again relied substantially on the research conducted at CRU - for example, in reconstructing the climate of the last thousand years with the help of so-called proxy data, such as tree rings or ice cores. In addition, CRU researchers also play a leading role in determining the global temperatures today.

Federated Farmers Media Release 28 July 2010

I have pasted an article that to me succinctly sums up the whole crazy
debate on global warming.It is quite long (as i don`t think you can use
links on this serve) but well worth a read.The article also goes into how
even though Richard Lindzen of MIT was brought into the UN`s IPCC for his
expertise,as he did not follow the ''plan'' he was vilified and hounded.This
is not how science is supposed to work..people like Lindzen publish papers
and people are free to criticize methodology,conclusions etc but as like
when Alan says that Lindzen ''has extreme right wing views'' that is
smearing the man instead of critiquing his work.
 

To read Nick Smith's letter click here

Dear Robyn,

National's failure to recognise the anger generated by the ETS will lose them the next election - but it's their choice.  As a supporter of this government I have my ears open to voters feelings on this matter, as should you after Dr Smith nearly faced a lynching party recently.  The feeling is very strongly against the ETS and it's from our supporters, especially farmers.

21 July 2010

The Carbon Sense Coalition today called for an end to the massive subsidies distorting all energy markets in the name of global warming.

The alarmists still won't separate science from politics

By Dr Geoff Duffy

Professor Emeritus- Chemical Engineering

Richard Treadgold | July 17, 2010

UPDATE 18 July – see end (Royal Society)

This is the second instalment of a review of Professor Sir Peter Gluckman’s speech of 9 June, entitled Integrity in Science: Implications from and for the Climate Change Debate. The first instalment was Gluckman stumbles on the truth.

In using the term “denialist”, our Chief Science Advisor descends to the sludge at the bottom of the barrel of scientific debate. It is a matter of profound regret that the CSA imports this malignant, divisive term to his prestigious office and the hallowed halls of the Royal Society.

Soaked in fallacy

There is no reason for an honest man of science to employ erroneous techniques of observation or debate, for what would it profit him? They would only ensure, first, that his argument fails and, second, that his credibility is damaged, the greater for being the higher in rank. So this is an enormous lapse in judgement by our top scientist and deserves the firmest reproach. Endorsement of Sir Peter’s comments, such as by the Royal Society (see below), is similarly reproachable.