tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6727975.post8866962514102430231..comments2024-03-25T16:30:58.213+13:00Comments on GREENIE WATCH: JRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00829082699850674281noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6727975.post-3874234685995072562009-12-11T00:43:17.134+13:002009-12-11T00:43:17.134+13:00ClimateGate alone now requires that questions are ...ClimateGate alone now requires that questions are asked and answers demanded, in the public interest, of the following Australian IPCC lead authors:<br /><br />Professor D. Karoly Melbourne University<br /><br />Professor A. Pitman UNSW<br /><br />Their data sources have been 'purchased' with public funds for public purposes. Those data must now be verified in the event that CRU (ClimateGate) data have been used. If CRU data have not been used then there is a considerable hole in the values assigned in their models. An explanation is required either way. <br /><br />Pitman blocks my emails. Karoly will not keep promises to review an article by NZ scientist Dr. Gray, a former IPCC expert reviewer, critical of IPCC science/modelling. That promise was made over 18 months ago!<br /><br />What is their problem? Loss of face, power, funding, overseas trips..?<br /><br />Another Australian climate scientist is Professor Brook of Adelaide - his abusive emails to me following a letter with 3 others from UK, The Netherlands and Greenland, published by the UN a couple of years ago - make those to and from CRU look like 'play school'! We showed temperature stasis and decline between 1998-2007 - and rising CO2 - and a please explain - no reply.<br /><br />Karoly, Pitman, Brook et al assert that anthropogenic CO2 DOES cause warming - but real science presents the issue as a NULL hypothesis that anthropogenic CO2 DOES NOT cause warming - - so proof please or the null hypothesis must be rejected - that's science - unfortunatley!D.N.P Dnoreply@blogger.com