Earlier in the week we had research from investigator, Ian Wishart, that showed that there were storms in the 19th century that were more serious and damaging as Cyclone Gabrielle which, as I understand NIWA (the New Zealand equivalent of NOAA).

Further it was revealed that the majority of these storms (over 80%, I think) are not on a NIWA database. 

MOST EXTREME WEATHER EVENTS OF THE PAST ARE NOT ON NZ GOVERNMENT’S DATABASE

This helps the government and compliant media to paint a picture that storms like Cyclone Gabrielle are unprecedented and a direct result of climate change.

The Esk Valley in Hawkes Bay in 1938

Wishart accurately pointed out that we had storms in the late 19th Century, at a time when the climate was cooler and CO2 levels in the atmosphere were much lower than what they are today. 

Even NIWA admits that 250mm a day has happened before pic.twitter.com/3CgFicdQjc

— Ian Wishart (@investigatemag) February 1, 2023

That was damning enough but subsequently a weather forecaster, Philip Duncan has revealed more. In an interview with the terrible Sean Plunket (who engages with these whistleblowers to further bolster his prejudices but acts as a bully towards those that bring out facts when it comes to the COVID-19 jabs). 

Duncan states that he doesn’t get into the climate change debate because of its political nature; he just sticks to what he was trained to do and forecast the weather. 

What he came up with next was a revelation that is shocking but hardly surprising given government policies over the last 35 or so years.

He validated what Ian Wishart had to say but went on to say:

But the the details he went into highlight a major problem that we’ve been talking about in New Zealand for well over 10 years, that we don’t have open data. And that means that government agencies can weaponize that information.

He went on to say that NIWA has been commercialising and weaponising their data for over a decade

By that I mean, they’re taking tax funded data, and selling it commercially, or they’re picking bits and pieces of it and putting it out as news stories, but it’s very hard to actually get into that area to verify a lot of what they’re saying.

It gets worse than that. It turns out we are the only country in the entire modern Western world to do this.

 We stand out like a banana republic with no open data.

To get it, you have to sign up to NIWA’s special website. You’ve got to sign confidentiality agreements, which is unheard of

This is information that should be available to everyone who wants to do research and which people have provided this free to NIWA and its predecessors over many years. 

Now, NIWA has put a paywall in front of this information and people have to sign a non-disclosure order to access it.

Duncan makes the comparison with Telecom who thought they owned the copper wire network and said, “this is ours. We don’t know we’re not going to let other phone companies use it”

NIWA is doing the exact same thing in treating public data as their property that belongs to them. 

We live in a country that is perpetually changing. Its really a young country, but when you look at other places around the world, so having major weather events, that’s just part of life here.

Now, if we had lots of data, it would be very easy for university students and people to be able to match a map, what is going on with our climate here, whether or not we are getting more storms, whether or not we are seeing more floods, that information is very, very, very hard to confirm in New Zealand.

He sums up by saying:

We basically have to wait for a government agency that is highly commercial, I have to keep mentioning that ruins their science, that they are the ones that drip feed it to the media and sort of exciting tweets, rather than it being just data that anyone can hear of you

COMMENT

As shocking as the dual revelations of Ian Wishart and Phillip Duncan are they are not that surprising to me. It was not surprising to hear that in terms of of withholding data and information the New Zealand government is the worst of the worst (“a banana republic with no open data“). 

Much of my time chronicling the climate on this blog has been to reveal various lies and distortions both here and abroad.

A few examples taken from my own memory:

Throughout this 11 year period Radio NZ and the media has underplayed climate change, especially when it comes to specifics which may indicate the situation may in fact be worse than they are painted. Throughout, the magic date was 2100, when according to them the sh*t was going to hit the fan.

• In 2018 I did a daily monitoring of temperatures at home during winter and found that the temperatures I was finding were up to 4C higher than those on the Metservice website. When I rang them, they said my figures were accurate. Their published temperatures were based on computer modelling and what their expectation of what temperatures should be.
• A few years ago Chris Bandolino of NIWA was interviewed on television and gave a fairly dire account of what was happened. A few days later, he was interviewed by Radio NZ and was obviously told to wind back his comments and say that generalisations could not be made from the data and it all needed “further research”. Since then the instructions have changed under the Labour government under its “climate emergency” and the message turned on its head
• Throughout the years my friend Margo and I have noticed various examples of data manipulation to show that ice melt in the Arctic and methane releases are not as bad as we are supposed to think. Examples are manipulation by CAMS and cutting-and-pasting of inconvenient satellite pictures by NASA. 
• Ice melt data has been distorted by only showing sea ice extent data and ignoring sea ice thickness and volume, which would confirm that ice quality is constantly declining and is mostly slush during the melt season
• On the other side of the ledger I have encountered other examples of manipulation of the weather records to show that, for example, the bush fires in Australia in 2019-20 were “the worst on record”, ignoring huge fires in the 1890’s.

Nowadays, I tend to ignore the official data with all its distortions and go more by my own observations that tell me:

• The last time I encountered a winter in the Wellington area that had clear, frosty days was in 2003, when Pam and I took up horseriding. Since then, there has not been a single “normal” winter; they have all been either peppered by regular flooding or been much,much warmer than days gone by.
• The climate (especially, the winter) I grew up with was substantially the same as that my father (born in 1912) grew up with. In recent years (at least since 2003) the climate has not been at all like that.
• With my own observations (and those of Margo), I can attest to the fact that the Arctic ice is in fact melting and getting worse year-on-year.
• I have come, in recent years, come to recognise the truth of the contribution made by geoengineering with the spraying of toxic nanoparticles and the “blotting out of the sun”. This is truly the 90 LB gorilla in the room.

These days I have more questions than answers (and ZERO solutions) and am being led to reassess how I understand the whole question of anthropogenic climate change. There is no doubt that there has been warming of the planet and that has correlated with increased concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere.

ut as to the causes I am less sure than I was before at any time in the last 30 years. 

Anthropogenic, yes – along with cycles we scarcely understand – but perhaps not in the way we are being told.

I have am coming to see that the climate change narrative we are being sold has more to do with agendas that are being pushed along the lines of Agenda-2030, the Great Reset than anything else.

Put quite simply, all my assumptions, held for a long time are open to question.