"I know" they said after red cordial time, one afternoon, "let's take the blooming climate scientists to court. Phnor phnor, it'll be great!"
And so they did.
At the High Court in Auckland today, The New Zealand Climate Science Education Trust, a branch of the NZ Climate Science Coalition, challenged national temperature records, saying the method used was unscientific. Jul 16, 2012And today the BAD BAD JUDGE brought back his decision and sided with the MAN against the brave new science persons.
A High Court ruling released today by Justice Geoffrey Venning said the New Zealand Climate Science Education Trust had not succeeded in any of its challenges against Niwa. Sept 7, 2012Even worser. The judge picked on two people speaking for the Brave Soldiers of Incomprehension.
Section 25 could only apply if Mr Dunleavy was an expert in the particular area of the science of meteorology and/or climate. He is not. He has no applicable qualifications. His interest in the area does not sufficiently qualify him as an expert.I also accept Mr Smith’s further point that Mr Dunleavy’s views are not capable of offering substantial help to this Court on the issue that it has to determine. To that extent I agree that substantial passages of Mr Dunleavy’s evidence are inadmissible.and:
To that extent, where Mr Dedekind purports to comment or give opinions as to NIWA’s application of statistical techniques in those fields, his evidence is of little assistance to the Court.Where the judge did agree with the vexationers was that NIWA's actions are testable in court. That could be a worry if there were more qualified people available, but I think they probably gave this their best shot.
Of course lesser grifters would take the navel lint (cockney rhyming slang for hint) and hit the frog and toad perhaps with a travelling medicine show, but these merchant bankers will be back in some form.
Nevermind, it is good afternoon in terms of the court result.
The world is still going to hell, o'course.
This post was made possible by the indefatigable No Right Turn who's on the blogroll.
The pdf of the judges decision is here. But he don't half go on
Update: this person whom I had not heard of previously got all giggly over the prospect of the case and yet provided a classic case of beclowning oneself when one of the people he was crowing about turned up in comments and said, "Er, thanks old chap but that's a load of porkpies". Also rude mechanical Another Kiwi turns up, if his comment is allowed on, and is rude and nasty.
Moar Updatedness: That person is promising that he will soon post a detailed analysis of just where the ebbul judge went rong and THEN YOU WILL ALL BE SADZ. I am shivering in an-tici-pashun.
12 comments:
A right pack of Berkshire Hunts to be sure.
The International Confederacy of Dunces is not to be trifled with.
Good Day, Sirs!
~
...And so today, I come before you to request, nay, to DEMAND that congress immediately pass a Constitutional Amendment repealing the Law of Gravity and send it to the states for ratification forthwith!
Science Court is completely elitist. I can do it myself but instead I have to hire some expensive guy from some fancy school and have HIM smash the atoms.
Someone just told me that "noncupatory" is a made-up word and not true. I WANT MY MONEY BACK!
I had wondered what a cupatory was to be nonned like that.
I had assumed it some sort of Brit Conservative drink and, you know, icky.
Someone just told me that "noncupatory" is a made-up word and not true. I WANT MY MONEY BACK!
It's a variation of nuncupative. Now, any other questioners of Jack Vance's wordsmithery shall have the Spell of the Macroid Toe inflicted upon them!
I suspect that Trevor is familiar with Vance's oeuvre.
Vance's oeuvre is, like, different from Hors d'oeuvre innit. Stupid old Hors.
I think it is something to do with eggs. French is a silly language.
A nonne, as any fule kno, is a French nun, so etymologically speaking noncupatory would be like being cupated (think incubated crossed with curated) by a nun. Sounds pretty icky to me.
Also, possibly illegal. Or at least, a serious breach of professional ethics.
Post a Comment