Still, I did get some interesting statements from him – which are useful. And his censorship gives me a good reason to keep away. Things do seem to be very quiet there now, though.

Perhaps he might even miss me, or the excitement I provided.

The word you are thinking of possibly relates somehow to masturbation.

I’m surprised Richard has deleted your stuff – he must be back to a one man conversation again (there must be a word for that!).

Heavens to Betsy, how could I have been so taken in??

[PS: I wonder if there's not a "Coalitiongate" story in this somewhere... ]

Anyway, behind the scenes I had been communicating with Richard and Vincent Gray by email. Trying to get clarification on the “paper”, their methodology and the degree of scientific input.

Besides being told that Richard has a “ascientific team” which wishes to remain anonymous – no luck.

A specific request for information on methodology and/or their spreadsheet was at first agreed and then denied. And they have the cheek to make malicious FOI request to NIWA!

If any reader is interested I have collated the emails and they can be downloaded at emails. They provide an indication of the dishonesty, manouvering and outright lying these people go in for.

That’s gold, every time a journalist turns to C”S”C for balance they should be reminded of that organisations dedication to scientific standards.