New Zealand sacks its top climate researcher for speaking with the media

Of course, for anyone who isn’t an AGW proponent, getting fired for speaking to the media about your job without your employer’s permission isn’t newsworthy. The judge should dismiss his suit with prejudice.

“His work now is to make room for over 30 years of scientific papers – the quality of which is not in question.” mmmmm well ok.
I have tried to source these interviews without success – anybody?

From the linked article:

“As scientists we’re all a bit eccentric and we all might slightly break protocol, but it’s not going to destroy NIWA”.

Um… as scientists do we all exaggerate, fabricate, and pontificate? I must have missed that day in scientist school.
Is this the beginning of a trend? One can only hope. I’m getting tired of encountering programmed automatons created by the likes of Salinger.

This guy wants to use his government job as a soapbox for political involvement. If he believes in the importance of what he says he should show some leadership and initiative and test his ideas in a campaign for office. It would probably involve more courage than he has though. Simply filing a lawsuit will be a coward’s choice. What are his damages supposed to be? I’m sure this character will have no problem finding employment among like minded friends outside of government.

Maybe it’s a trend. Some of these media types just pull things off the net so they have more time to ski, or hike, or golf, or what ever. Journalism has died.

He doesn’t think he’s doing poor science?
Dr Jim Salinger here’s a few things you might want to brush up on
1. CO2 going up, up and away, while temps are going down. – Doesn’t your ‘good’ science say CO2 drives temps? Not looking like it. Looking at the trends I’d say we have about another 25 to 30 years of temps not rising. So much for CO2 driving temps.
2. CO2 was MUCH higher when the Dinosaurs were around – Doesn’t your ‘good’ science say we’ll turn into Venus with too much CO2. – At least that’s what your Nobel buddy Al Gore says.
3. Why is global sea ice increasing? Oh yeah, the video game your pals designed says global warming, causes global sea ice to increase, yet at the same time ‘magically’ Antarctica is going to melt and increase sea levels 20 feet.
Dr Jim Salinger you may not have been the one that did these studies, but you SUPPORT them, which is very poor science.
If I was representing my company and went around talking about how models show the tooth fairy exists I think I’d be fired. Especially if I was a scientist, b/c that would really show how inept I am as a scientist.

Rule: NZ government officials don’t speak in public without obtaining prior approval.
Action: NZ government official speaks in public without obtaining prior approval.
Results: Government official gets dismissed for speaking in public without approval.
Said sacked official wonders why he was fired.
This is an example of two characteristics of the AGW movement: a lack of simple logic and a disconnect due to their evangelism.

Go to http://www.theaustraliannews.com.au/story/0,25179,25376454-758
Jan Veizer April24 . ‘Climate change science isn’t settled’.
Keep up the brilliant work, though I am loosing one or two ,so called, friends.
Baz

It will be a wonderfully positive sign that our society is on the mend if those who promote advocacy rather than honesty are removed from public positions. Don’t count on it though. It is still the opinion of too many that “The end justifies the means.”

Is he to become the Jim Hansen of the NZ? Another AGW scientist that will not blame his science but the government for stopping him telling the world how we are all going to die. Who is the NZ equivalent to Al Gore?

OT:
In House Energy and Commerce Sub-committed testimony, Mr. Gore just equated AGW deniers with Bernie Madoff, stating that the deniers are perpetrating a greater fraud on the world. He also said “There is no legitimate basis for denying [GW].” Golly, I thought the recent data was legitimate.

I love this quote, it JUMPS off the page… “As scientists we’re all a bit eccentric and we all might slightly break protocol, but it’s not going to destroy NIWA”.
Let’s look at this quote. Are people employed and paid “as long as they don’t DESTROY” the organizations that pay them??? I missed that memo at my work. I guess things like following your supervisor’s instructions, and company policies are just extras – don’t destroy us and we’ll pay you for life… Good luck finding a job in this Climate! 😉
That’s not very Christian, I hope that he does find work and that God’s will is served through this experience. I have often found in all walks of life that a firing leads to a new hiring and things often happen for a reason, wish him a wake up call and all the best!
Sincerely,
Dave

My first reaction was that Hansen will give him a better job.

Is this person really an AGW proponent and he was fired? How could this happen to him?
As I previously thought, no one can lose his/her job because of promoting AGW and supplying the media with an endless source of scaremongering stories. But if you are a government-funded researcher and you are expressing your skeptical views publicly, you shouldn’t be surprised if you lose your funding and/or get fired suddenly.
Fortunately (like the climate itself), things are always changing. However, in the case of Jim Hansen and his civil disobedience movement I can’t be so optimistic.

Obviously a dastardly plot by Big Oil to surpress the truth about the dangers of AGW!

OT… Swine influenza hits Mexico. We have more than 800 suspected cases and 57 deaths in several states of the country. I hope there is not a politician who would attribute it to global warming.
Regarding the case of Dr Jim Salinger, it makes me angry because true scientists are being fired for doing correct science. This is evidence on the existence of a crusade against those who struggle with the weapons of truth against the climate change priesthood.

Uh-Oh!!! Bigger mistake… Dr. Salinger is on the other sideway, that is, on the wrong side. Sorry.

I find it interesting that Gore is using the “Fraud”. I believe he wants to get out first and loudest to Congress and the Media – right after he read Lord Monckton’s Report.

On eTaiwanNews: NZ climate scientist fired for unapproved comments

“Jim Salinger was let go for breaching a new policy at the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research requiring scientists to have prior approval before speaking to media.”

I think this is a standard organizational ‘mechanism’; that one is required (at least ‘by the letter’) to run media-engagements etc past the Boss before jaunting off to effectively represent the Government, the Military, one’s University, or her local Brownie Troop, all by one’s little lonesome.
This type of rule or control often exists, but generally lies moribund for extended lengths of time. But given the right circumstances, it can suddenly be dusted off & enforced … to much gnashing & rending.
Could it be applied to NASA’s Jim Hansen? Certainly. Could he be hung out to dry purely for innocuously promoting “civil disobedience”? Probably not. Could he be sent packing for using lenient American rules that allow for orderly civil disobedience, as a ‘cover’ to instead engage to foment violent, destruction or subversive activities?
In a heart beat. … That is, the moment that authorities decide his usefulness (which I assume largely explains the Hansen-Circus) has come to an end.

however … I tried to confirm the link from a source at the P.A. of Sciences, but did not succeed … the “the Geologic Science Committee of the Polish Academy of Sciences” is mentioned, and I checked a website ” http://www.ing.pan.pl/index_E.htm ” , but I did not find any mention of the report … I wouldn’t know if that is the correct place to look …
anybody interested and more succesfull ?
tia

The law of Unintended Consequences at work. A new tax credit is given to paper mills for *adding* fossil fuels (diesel) to their fuel mix for power generation. Oops.
http://www.minnpost.com/stories/2009/04/24/8321/paper_firms_reap_billions_from_tax_credit_–_but_should_they

CodeTech (09:53:30),
The reaction of Greenpeace – talking to New Zealand like they’re the USA browbeating North Korean – raises the question: Could the dismissal of Salinger be a way to confront the ever-growing sense of peerage with which Green & AGW NGOs interact with global States?
Is it, perhaps, that the entities whom the Salingers of the world champion have finally gotten just one size too big for their britches?
That is: It ain’t Salinger – it’s Greenpeace.

Ok, I didn’t realize that beer was at risk because of global warming… I will now become an Algoreholic and send in the next ten years of cap ant trade taxes to the US government… I figure my life savings might at least put a down payment on it… heck it’s dropped halfway in value anyway… my kids and grandkids can pay the rest.
Not really, I’m fighting this thing to the bitter end.

Truman fired General MacArthur for insubordination, not for being a bad general. Likewise, the firing of Sallinger shows that in New Zealand at least, people aren’t above the rules.

Highlighted and accessible on Drudge RIGHT NOW !!!!
Democrats Refuse to Allow Skeptic to Testify Alongside Gore At Congressional Hearing
http://www.drudgereport.com/

John Galt (10:42:01) :
Who is that guy anyway?
😉

The missing “bio” page had a navigation breadcrumb header of ” > NIWA Science > National Climate Centre > Contacting the NCC > NCC Coordinators > Salinger bio > Staff Profile”
So it used to list Salinger as an NCC contact person.
The web site has been redesigned, and now if you traverse the menus to find contact people for climate you land on http://www.niwa.co.nz/our-science/climate/key-contacts
and listed are: Dr David Wratt (Position: Chief Scientist, Climate. “He is a member of the Bureau of the IPCC and a Vice-Chair of Working Group 1, which assesses the physical science of climate change.”) and Dr Andrew Tait (Position: Climate Scientist. “…acts as a NCC liaison with the media.”)

Ray (10:19:53) : Excuse me, but that sounds like utter nonsense. Nature has no red flags. All flags are 100% anthropogenic which can be proven beyond doubt.

Actually, the former Prime Minister Helen Clark is now head of UNDEP.

NZ is very proud of its clean green image and had hoped to attract huge attention as THE world leader in carbon mitigation. Big fantasies of world fame. I think the mere thought of taxing agricultural animal emissions started to wake some of them up.
Isolated, as they are, and having lost enormous numbers of educated people over the ditch, (males in particular), their nanny state got out of control with Helengrad at the helm. Desiring leadership, and anti-American to the core, they invested a lot of naive hope in the UN as the standard.
Over-feminized in general, they have finally begun to come to their senses.
They also have extremely protective labor laws, it wouldn’t surprise me if Salinger wins a huge settlement over some detail.

All the World’s a Playstation
Tom Quirk
http://www.quadrant.org.au/magazine/issue/2009/4/all-the-world-s-a-playstation
Meanwhile, in another part of the forest, a powerful tool had been created. In the early 1970s Robert C. Merton, Myron S. Scholes and Fischer Black developed a pioneering approach for the valuation of stock options. In 1973, the Black–Scholes Option Pricing formula appeared. Thousands of traders and investors now use this formula every day to value stock options in markets throughout the world. Robert Merton devised another method to derive the formula that turned out to have very wide applicability.
Merton and Black were awarded the 1997 Nobel Prize for Economics. In a press release announcing the award the Nobel Foundation stated, “Their methodology has paved the way for economic valuations in many areas. It has also generated new types of financial instruments and facilitated more efficient risk management in society.”
Now are there lessons to be learned in other parts of the forest? An interesting starting point is the collapse of Lehman Brothers. Lehman were setting themselves to be leaders in carbon emissions trading when their world suddenly entered an ice age. They were close to a Nobel Prize winner, Al Gore.
So the enabling technology for this disaster has been the computer, the spreadsheet and risk modelling—all possibly mixed in with Quants with little experience of the actual assets involved and a belief in computer-generated models of risk.
For climate change many would argue that the only “evidence” for the dangers we may face comes from computer models.
Here we assess risk helped by the IPCC with statements such as “it is very likely” that the surface temperature will warm by three degrees Celsius in the next one hundred years.
The belief in climate modelling parallels the belief in financial risk modelling. The practitioners have been brought up to use computers as a primary tool for investigation. It has become so extreme that one lead IPCC author described the difference between model calculations and an actual measurement where the chance of the two overlapping was less than 5 per cent as “[measurements] consistent with model simulations, just larger than model average”! So now calculations verify measurements, where in classic science it used to be the other way round.
Dr Kevin Trenberth, another lead IPCC author stated: “None of the models used by the IPCC are initialised to the observed state, and none of the climate states in the models correspond even remotely to the current observed climate.”
“… think about Al Gore, his Nobel Prize and what may follow.”

Re Barley crops(Mentioned above) In the late 1940’s and early 1950’s Barley was considered as a fast maturing drop as the Growing season was nibbling at two months in Northeastern Oregon.-the last time the PDO shifted cold without the added Solar Minimum being as severe…
Seriously the State Wheat commission was worried about northern Canada-like conditions…

It is always fascinating to read about a happening in NZ on the web before I see it in the local media. It is 7-30am in New Zealand as I write. A quick check of one of NZ’s largest daily newspapers online reveals nothing immediately – a search on Jim Salinger’s name does however reveal a brief factual story together with a raft of fairly innocuous weather related articles – see http://www.nzherald.co.nz
To be sure, Jim’s views fall within the AGW camp – and I happen to disagree with him on that score. But I firmly disagree with anyone of whatever persuasion having their views stifled simply because some of us disagree, or that the opinion doesn’t fit with a “mainstream” view. Isn’t that what we all want – a proper debate, where all viewpoints are fairly aired ??
Whatever Jim’s views on climate he has always been a good humoured friendly presence on television and in print. No I don’t agree with him, but just as I want my view to be heard – it shouldn’t be at the expense of others’ views being shut down, whatever the excuse – such as talking to the media without prior permission. What a sad indictment on NIWA.
Do we applaud the fact that Monckton is not permitted the opportunity to debate with Al Gore ?? Should we rejoice in the apparent demise of one weatherman whatever his views on the simple excuse his talking to the media was not “permitted” – one who by my perception is a genial gentleman who gives out a fresh and insightful view on just the weather for goodness sake.

World Commission for Agricultural Meteorology
How is that distinct from ordinary meteorology?

The schadenfreude detectable hereabouts isn’t necessarily noble.
But as prisoners of a perpetual underclass, used to being stifled by our ‘betters’ who have successfully gamed the system, it’s rather refreshing to see one of them get sent to the penalty box — for once.
Hooray for our side!
We’ll take ’em where we can get ’em. This isn’t pattycake.

I hate it when AGWers uses the word “consensus”.
In the past, consensus by public and professionals deemed:
a) The Earth is flat.
b) The Sun orbited around the Earth.
c) Galileo is a heretic.
d) Bloodletting can be used to cure many ailments and diseases.
e) Washing hands by doctors before operations and births is not necessary.
and so on.
Today all the above looks silly and quaint. Yet these statements were once believed by decision makers and rulers. Consensus without the backing of real and verifiable science and data (models do not count) is meaningless.

Norm Beazer (12:56:29),
I do agree with your protective stance on the matter of free speech. We don’t want governments or agencies using ‘protocol’ rules to stifle expression.
There is a difficulty in our present case, because NIWA is not revealing the details of Dr. Salinger’s offences. We therefore can’t really determine whether he obviously did step over the line (possibly repeatedly, with warnings), or whether perhaps NIWA is trumping up excuses to go after the guy. (Or, as has been suggested by a previous commenter, that a combination of clumsiness by both Salinger and his superiors escalated in an unprofessional manner.)
Still, agencies such as NIWA are not under an obligation to allow a longstanding employee to aggrandize his position into what can grow to become the equivalent of a government official, or Representative. A person in Dr. Salinger’s position – with 30 years tenure on the job and extensive social contacts – can use what is supposed to be a non-political, non-representational position within an agency like NIWA, to act as though he really is speaking for, on behalf of, or in an adversarial capacity against the government.
If the WonderGreen Motor Company hires me to make a better tire for their cars, I am perfectly free to go on the air and talk about my love of wilderness and my efforts to protect penguins in Antarctica … but I am not free to engage in high level explorations of the potential to improve society, save the environment, etc by modifying the tires we put on cars. I agreed – explicitly or by implication & context – to allow my Boss to call the shots on what will and will not be discussed with the media or with other parties, on the subject of tire-improvements, when I took the job. So did Jim Salinger.
In this case, it appears (we do not yet have the detailed facts) that Salinger has given himself permission to essentially become involved in the policy-phases of the role that NIWA plays within the government – a function that he quite likely does not properly hold, a prerogative that actually belongs with other people & offices.
The job of the hired scientist is to conduct the science. Interpreting that science, or deciding how to use it to educate & guide the public, is quite another matter, one in which the government has a large stake, and often this function is one we citizens fully expect to be discharged by duly selected representatives & leaders of the people, which Mr. Salinger is not.
Take another example: Methane Hydrates. We have a stupendous quantity of methane frozen into dirty, slushy ice beneath the ocean floor. It could fuel our civilization for a long time. The energy it contains could neutralize & remove the dangerous chronic issues of the Middle Eastern Oil Patch.
We have scientists who do a lot of research on methane hydrates, who really know more about them than anyone else – but is it their place as public-employee scientists to lobby for their exploitation – or against any exploitation? No – what to do or not do with or about methane hydrates is a policy matter, and does not belong in the hands of the ‘hired brain’ that society has commissioned to look into the phenomenon of submarine hydrates.
Does Dr. Salinger lose certain portions of the full scope of important rights that all of us hold dear, as a condition of the employment he has accepted & enjoyed these many years? Yes, he is subject to that compromise. Is it right that NIWA or higher authority vested in New Zealand can exercise control over the role he plays in the public sphere? Yes, it is: we expect the government to retain authority over policy.
It is the de facto reality that organizations like Greenpeace are trying to effect policy and exert authority within many governments, around the world. This is improper. It could well even be subversive. To wield the powers to which they aspire, Greenpeace ought to run for elective office, and submit themselves to the ballot. But they don’t, you’ll notice.
Greenpeace appears to be the primary champion of Dr. Salinger, following his dismissal, and that is probably because he is a major tool for effecting the role they would like to assign to themselves, in managing society as they see fit, without the inconvenience of winning the citizens’ vote.
Notice that the former US Senator and Vice President, Al Gore, is currently wielding great power in the US government … having entirely abandoned the elective process (at which he nearly succeeded) and has now allied himself with non-governmental organizations. Al Gore is an example of the kind of problem we don’t want to see a Jim Salinger or Jim Hansen grow into.
The potential for really unfortunate outcomes is real, and Al Gore is Exhibit A.

Thing is, if Salinger is such a good Scientist, how come he crusades for the pro-AGW camp? A “good” Scientist would be among the “skeptics” — wouldn’t he?

alex verlinden (10:14:46) : said,
however … I tried to confirm the link from a source at the P.A. of Sciences, but did not succeed … the “the Geologic Science Committee of the Polish Academy of Sciences” is mentioned, and I checked a website ” http://www.ing.pan.pl/index_E.htm ” , but I did not find any mention of the report … I wouldn’t know if that is the correct place to look …
anybody interested and more succesfull ?
tia
Here is the link thanks to Luboš Motl.
http://www.kngeol.pan.pl/images/stories/pliki/2.Stanowisko%20KNG%20w%20sprawie%20zmian%20klimatu.pdf
and translation by Benny Peiser
http://www.kngeol.pan.pl/images/stories/pliki/2.Stanowisko%20KNG%20w%20sprawie%20zmian%20klimatu.pdf

For my money, it all boils down to a simple binary decision.
Whether he thinks A or B has no bearing. If you follow the rules, you have a job — when you break the rules, then you don’t work here any longer.

CodeTech:
“. . . this isn’t about “stifling” someone, it’s about them using their role in a Government organization to advance an agenda. Just as many of these personalities have done and are doing.”
No – I very much doubt this is correct. Have a look at the NIWA web page: the last time I looked they still had the hockey stick prominent, and they are firmly AGW. So is [was] Jim Salinger.
“Personally I don’t care what he or Hanson have to say, they can shout it from the rooftops for all I care…” That is all very fine: my point is that denying the right to free expression to one group harms us all. The veneer of civilisation is rather thin at times.
James from NZ:
“Jim S. must have been making public comments so far removed from the science taking place within NIWA” I very much doubt this is so, Jim S is [was] very much part of the AGW team. Unless . . . unless he was in the throes of turning his views around ?? Interesting. His recent report on long term weather changes in parts of NZ having an effect on the production of beer could well have been a little tongue in cheek. Maybe, just maybe his views have changed, despite his previous involvement in the IPCC. We will just have to wait and see. But speculation is such fun . . .

One of New Zealand’s top climate scientists, Jim Salinger, has been fired from his job at the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (Niwa).
The high-profile scientist, whose work contributed to a Nobel prize, is reported to have been sacked for ignoring a new Niwa policy against speaking publicly without prior approval.
“I can’t understand it, it’s not as though I’m doing bad science, it’s not as though I’m under-performing, so I’m really astounded,” Dr Salinger said on TV One News tonight.
TV One said Niwa had accused Dr Salinger of serious misconduct after he took part in a programme the channel produced about glaciers.
The Green Party said Dr Salinger was dismissed earlier this week for helping TVNZ weatherman Jim Hickey with climate-related inquiries.
The scientist has frequently appeared in TV climate reports and has spoken in the media about climate change.
“Niwa’s actions will make all government scientists nervous about their jobs,” said Green Party co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons.
“New Zealand is on a slippery slope when trying to provide Kiwis with a greater understanding of our climate is a sackable offence.”
Ms Fitzsimons said scientists should be able to help the public and the media with scientific problems, particularly around issues like climate change.
“An investigation is needed into how it came to be that one of New Zealand’s foremost scientists was frog-marched out of his job for what appears to be trivial and petty reasons.”
Ms Fitzsimons said the Minister of Research, Science and Technology, Wayne Mapp, should call in Niwa and tell them to “get to the bottom of this messy matter”.
Greenpeace said it wanted answers from Niwa and the Government.
“Dr Salinger has done some amazing work to educate New Zealanders about climate change and he is highly respected internationally,” said Greenpeace senior climate campaigner Simon Boxer.
“He was very clear about the need for urgent climate action in New Zealand.”
TV One reported Dr Salinger was considering claiming unjustified dismissal.
– NZPA

For 9 years NZ had an aggressively pro AGW Labour government, they couldn’t sign up for Kyoto quick enough, during those years thousands of positions in government departments have been filled with fellow travellers of dubious quality as the public sector grew by 50%.
The incoming liberal /conservative National Government is busy replacing staff & stamping its authority on all departments, budget cuts are a certainty, job cuts will follow. NIWA bosses will be under the gun like everybody else Jim Salinger’s demise will be a clear warning to the AGW camp that the current government is much more sceptical about AGW and the need for Carbon taxes etc.
Salinger was an AGW promoter as are a number of senior NIWA staffers but his demise will be a sharp reminder to others toe the line or else.

By the way, you NZers out there… If you can be in Lower Hutt at lunchtime on Tuesday 5 May, Hungarian scientist Dr Miklos Zagini (who will be in Wellington to address the parliamentary ETS committee) will give a public presentation on “why greenhouse gases cannot cause climate change”. Shall I invite Jim Salinger?

Polish Academy of Sciences item #2 ignored the augmented impact of continental drift, potentially a significant contributing factor to the current ice age cycle.
On another note, are we experiencing yet another “cyclical” change? During the Bush era, the media “sold” news by denigrating the Administration’s refusal to support AGW. Now that a pro-AGW Administration is in office, are they beginning to sell news by questioning Cap and Trade and other AGW inspired policies?
One pebble does not a trend make, but one pebble an avalanche can make!

Steve Schapel (16:53:14) :
By the way, you NZers out there… If you can be in Lower Hutt at lunchtime on Tuesday 5 May, Hungarian scientist Dr Miklos Zagini (who will be in Wellington to address the parliamentary ETS committee) will give a public presentation on “why greenhouse gases cannot cause climate change”. Shall I invite Jim Salinger?
——————————
Go for it – the guy can always retool himself for a new career in “the coming ice age” doomsaying.

Norm Beazer, you didn’t quote the most important part of my comment:
NOT ON GOVERNMENT LETTERHEAD.
That means, these guys should be using their own resources to spread their unwarranted message of doom and gloom and catastrophe, not government resources and agencies. In the old days they’d be walking up and down the streets with a “The End Is Near” sign. Now they have direct access to the media and a voice of authority that is also called the bully pulpit.
That is my position and I stand by it.
It is not a violation of “free speech” to stop someone from using a position to advance a personal agenda. He and others are free to spread their message on their own.

It is perhaps coincidental that Dr S, a member of the UN thinktank on climate change is dismissed as Helen Clark becomes head of the UNDEP. If the National government imagine there could be a UN conspiracy to hijack NZ’s climate policy, with outside pressure pushing from above assisted by an insider employee in an influential position pushing from below then they have acted to disarm this early on. What people may fail to realise is that NIWA’s mission statement is to be spokespeople for the environmental policy of the current government, whoever that is. There is no mission statement to the effect that individual state-salaried scientists are free to write privately to lobby media in the name of NIWA. Labour needed the Greens, National doesn’t, so National can more afford global warming skepticism until proven otherwise. Just because a person does a phD in global warming doesn’t mean he is correct, any more than if he did a degree in Creationism. It just means he is more likely to be employed by a government needing that kind of figurehead to write its policy reports in scientific jargon. As soon as the government changed Dr S should have started applying for other work. I sympathise with anyone losing their job, and I believe Dr S passionately believed whatever he said, but NIWA’s outlooks are so frequently incorrect the late Augie Auer called for the disbanding of the organisation. Whenever Dr S mentions NZ’s receding glaciers, when he doesn’t also mention all the advancing ones he displays a personal bias that is very bad science and bad for all science. Remember, the taxpayer pays his wages.

Evan Thornley a Victorian State Government Minister resigned his position to take a job with a French Electric Car provider while the his own government was negotiating with aforementioned French company ( although he denies any conflict of interest). However the reason for this post is that he now wants to fill Victoria Australia with useless windfarms to produce electricity for his electric cars – all to save the the planet from warming. This is the man that made a fortune in the dot com boom – I guess always the opportunist!

Hi Cassandra
From an interested Kiwi – Do you have any links to the BBC critisising NZ democratic administration?

Neville (16:37:00) : The sacking of Salinger came two days after a new book debunking global warming was released in NZ, “Air Con: The Seriously Inconvenient Truth About Global Warming”, by an investigative journalist over here named Ian Wishart.
There’s a preview of Air Con at http://www.tbr.cc

I’ve just finished reading the book, and I would recommend it in general. He’s been careful to reference all his sources carefully, and being a journalist he has a fairly racy writing style. I think we’ll see the NZ Greens having a hernia soon about this one.
Nevilee, your link doesn’t work (Server Error), but this one should:
Air Con by Ian Wishart

NZ has some of the most “employee favourable” employment legislation in the world.
If NIWA have not followed the correct procedure Jim could yet get his job back. But he has been annoying people with his public statements for a while. Jim has been to NIWA what James is to NASA. An embarrassment
This is a key point: In New Zealand, before anyone is dismissed, they generally have to have been through a process of numerous verbal and written warnings, although “serious misconduct” can lead to relatively instant dismissal. I doubt that they could argue that this was ‘serious misconduct’, and it sounds like he was warned several times. In short: I would guess that he had been told what not to do, and decided to do it anyway.
And our ‘green’ party aren’t green – they’ve been taken over by the reds.

The trouble is all the AGW Greenie nutjobs are gonna leave NZ and come to Australia…. Can we stop AGW Greenie boat people too 😉

At least the rule of law applies in NZ. Maybe we could expect the same in the USA.

OT: What is the streak on the magnetogram and LASCO C3? Did it capture a comet?
http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/data/realtime-images.html

I really hate to say it, but Hansen and Gore etc. remind me of the novel: Lord of the Flies, where an out-of-control authority is blindly followed by drones. They are really that dangerous I believe.

Norm Beazer (16:04:28) :
‘“Personally I don’t care what he or Hanson have to say, they can shout it from the rooftops for all I care…” That is all very fine: my point is that denying the right to free expression to one group harms us all. The veneer of civilisation is rather thin at times.’
But the free expression of that one group in the scientific community which is critical of AGW is systematically and institutionally suppressed…..yesterday, today and tomorrow. THAT harms us all.
No one takes satisfaction in Dr. Salinger’s personal misfortune. Further, AGWers hardly lack free expression as a group. It is the prospect of a shift in the debate, that our voice is getting stronger, that is encouraging.

Andrea (06:38:59),
You reference a 0.6 W/m^2 reduction of incoming energy, which sounds like about 1/500th the averaged incidence.
The story I have long been told is the answer to go with, and have recently seen repeated (in conjunction with the low activity of Cycle 24), is that variation on this scale is not significant, that it is too far down in the ‘grass’ of background noises that influence climate.
This becomes an issue, because people notice climate variations in the record which correspond with solar cycles. But the straight physics read says, ‘No, this should not do anything’.
Yet obviously, correlations with solar cycles remain. So, we see efforts to find a solar causation, by e.g. invoking changes in cosmic ray penetration through a charge-reduced upper atmosphere, creating more clouds at low level (just like the dry-ice cloud-chamber in high school physics). Could be, sounds nifty.
Lorentz is of course famous for using the analogy of a butterfly’s wings over the Pacific Ocean, creating or halting major weather systems. Is this what you are pointing to? If so, I think in the case of this particular putative ‘flutter’, we have not yet found the butterfly (which doesn’t mean one isn’t there..).
But everyone I see weigh in on it, says 0.6 W/m^2 etc won’t “drive” the observed effect. That’s only a small fraction of 1%, and the stern physics types say it will take something like a 2-4% solar variation (a good order of magnitude more), before we expect to see it even start to drive climate.

~snip~ No personal attacks, please.

Jin Salinger was fired for giving weather information away for free when the firm he works for wants to sell it to TV channels.