It seems Jim Hansen of NASA and his manipulated temperature data would not be recognized in a court of law in the United States. It seems this means the theory that man is causing global warming is invalid, and any laws, or legal actions based upon it must be negated. Any lawyers out there who can comment on this?
Will Richardson says:
August 11th, 2007 at 7:17 pm
Re: 2&3 Bigcitylib.
No. The point is that substantial and material adjustments are being made to the temperature “record” relied on by climate scientists, the adjustments support the hypothesis of AGW, and the adjuster (Jim Hansen of NASA) refuses to disclose the data and calculations which he assures the public justify his adjustments.
In law, this would not be allowed. Let me quote from Florida Rule of Evidence 90.705 (actually Section 90.705, Florida Statutes):
90.705 Disclosure of facts or data underlying expert opinion.–
(1) Unless otherwise required by the court, an expert may testify in terms of opinion or inferences and give reasons without prior disclosure of the underlying facts or data. On cross-examination the expert shall be required to specify the facts or data.
(2) Prior to the witness giving the opinion, a party against whom the opinion or inference is offered may conduct a voir dire examination of the witness directed to the underlying facts or data for the witness’s opinion. If the party establishes prima facie evidence that the expert does not have a sufficient basis for the opinion, the opinions and inferences of the expert are inadmissible unless the party offering the testimony establishes the underlying facts or data.
The Federal Rule is similar. In other words, Hansen’s “adjusted” temperature “record” would be inadmissible in a court of law almost anywhere in the United States, as would any evidence based on his temperature “record”.