Oh Dear, Another Climate Scientist Makes A Fool Of Himself
Guest post by Paul Homewood
I sometimes get accused of being too dismissive of Climate Scientists, probably with justice. However, there are times when they just set themselves up to be shot down.
The Irish Times, (yes, don’t ask me why!!) has just run a report from Courtland, Kansas on the drought last year. Most of the farmers interviewed believe it is all just part of a natural cycle. One typical farmer was quoted
“In western Kansas we sit to the east of the Rocky Mountains, where it is drier. I remember the 1955/56 drought and 1988. My dad went through the 1930s and had to move to the west coast,” said Ron Neff, a farmer in Selden, 150 miles west of Courtland.
But apparently the scientists know better!
Chuck Rice, a professor of soil microbiology and a climate change expert at Kansas State University in Manhattan, Kansas, says there is no doubt that droughts are cyclical but temperatures clocked last year in the most recent dry spell have beaten historical records.
“The records weren’t just slightly broken; they were significantly higher,” he said.
Now you would have thought a Climate Scientist from a Kansas University would at the very least be familiar with Kansas historical climate records. Unfortunately, it seems not, though.
The Facts (for Chuck’s benefit)
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/cag3/ks.html
Let’s start at the state level. Kansas summer temperatures last year ranked 110 out of 118, in other words, 9th warmest since 1895. The hottest summer was 1934, with an average temperature of 83.2F, a full 4.0F higher than last year. 1936 followed in 2nd place with 82.2F.
What about July, the hottest month of the season? Last year was 7th warmest. Again, 1934 was hottest, 2.4F hotter than 2012. The second hottest year, interestingly, was 1980, closely followed by 1954 and 1936.
Of course, averages can cover up a multitude of sins, so what about the extremes? According to the Climatological Data for July 1934, (below)
“Temperatures of 110F or higher occurred in almost every part of the State”.
This is borne out by the data for individual stations. Out of 91 stations, 76 reached 110F. Figures for 1936 were very similar, 77 out of 89. And what about 2012? Just 15 out of 145.
KS_climate_IPS-A48BA846-7987-4DC1-BA33-7B3AFA52FF09 (PDF)
From NCDC IPS: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/IPS/cd/cd.html
The highest temperature ever recorded in Kansas, was 121F, set on two separate days in 1936 at Fredonia and Alton. We also know that, analysing the 28 USHCN stations in Kansas with long term data, 27 recorded temperatures in the 1930’s that were higher than anything registered last year.
Still, perhaps the good Professor was referring to his own particular part of Kansas, which the article was based on. Courtland is a small town in the northern part of the State. The weather station there only dates back to 1961. The nearest station with a long term record is Concordia, about 20 miles away. (It is also close to Manhattan, where Kansas State University is based).
Comparison of monthly mean temperatures at Concordia show:-
| 1934 | 1936 | 2012 | |
| June | 80.3 | 76.8 | 76.5 |
| July | 88.4 | 87.2 | 84.3 |
| August | 82.5 | 85.2 | 74.6 |
And a closer look at July numbers shows:-
| 1934 | 1936 | 2012 | |
| Highest Temperature | 114 | 113 | 107 |
| Average Maximum Temperature | 101.7 | 100.5 | 97.8 |
| Days =>105F | 15 | 10 | 3 |
At the Professor’s town of Manhattan, temperatures reached 115F in both 1934 and 1936. And last year? 107F!
So what have we got?
On a State wide basis:-
- Mean temperatures were much higher in both 1934 and 1936, than in 2012, for the summer as a whole, and July in particular.
- Extreme high temperatures were far more widespread in 1934 and 1936.
- At nearly every USHCN station, the top temperatures, set in both 1934 and 1936, were several degrees higher than 2012.
And on a local scale?
- Mean temperature for each summer month at Concordia was significantly higher in 1934 and 1936.
- Daytime temperatures were also much higher then.
- Extreme heat days were between three and five times as frequent.
- High temperatures were up to 7F higher.
Conclusions?
We have a Professor at Kansas State University making statements that are not simply inaccurate, but wildly wrong. What could be the explanation?
- Is he simply incompetent? This seems unlikely, he would hardly be a Professor, if so.
- Does he think, a la Hayhoe, that history started in 1960?
- Is he blind to any evidence that contradicts his agenda?
- Like the old Soviets, has he swallowed the propaganda, and cannot believe it was hotter in the past?
- Is he even aware that the records I have accessed are available? Does he know how to check them himself?
- Has the climate gravy train really got so bad, that “science” of this sort is acceptable?
- Or does he think it is OK to make up “facts” as he goes along, so long as they suit his agenda? (Safe in the knowledge that our lame stream media are too useless and babyish to check and contradict).
Whatever the answer, it is a sad day for science, in general, and climate science, in particular, when this sort of nonsense is promulgated, and furthermore, allowed to stand.
References
State Climatological Reports are available here.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/IPS/cd/cd.html
http://www.k-state.edu/media/mediaguide/bios/ricebio.html
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Chuck Rice on the scrapheap.
another one that needs analysing, not to mention the utter hypocrisy of exporting emissions overseas!
20 Feb: ABC Australia: Australian landscape absorbs one third of carbon from fossil fuels
The first full national carbon audit found that on average more than 2 billion tonnes of carbon is soaked up by plants, soil and vegetation each year.
***It also found that over recent years Australia is exporting up to two and a half times more carbon in fossil fuels than is being burnt here.
And as global emissions increase, the lead author of the CSIRO report warns that the landscape will struggle to continue as a major carbon sink…
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2013/s3694437.htm
Anything known about the context of these quotes? It doesn’t seem likely that the Irish Times simply called up a Kansas climate scientist for a comment, although it could happen. Finding out, or finding a more extensive quote, should one exist, looks like the first step in unravelling such garbledness.
“Is he simply incompetent? This seems unlikely, he would hardly be a Professor, if so.”
I think your argument has provided what they call Prima Facie evidence that this is the most likely cause. And I have known enough Professors to know that “competence” in a University setting is often only measured in the political sense.
Hi
The last four posts are simply ridicule of climate scientists — seemingly warranted. But enough is enough. This is not fun to read at all. More facts and analysis are desired. Please try to resist the temptation to heap contempt on one’s political opponents and stick closer to the science. I like this site but not the use of contempt.
Jim
I heard some guy from Enviroment Canada say on the radio that every year for the last 16 years has been hotter that the last. Really??? Every year and every part of Canada has been hotter?
You would think by now all that snow we get on the may long weekend would eventually turn to rain.
Where do they come up with this stuff.
“■Is he simply incompetent? This seems unlikely, he would hardly be a Professor, if so.
Um, sadly over the last 30 years or so this statement is being falsified more often then confirmed I fear.
He’s a professor of soil microbiology, and we’ll grant him expertise in climate change.
By the way, the Irish Times confuses west with east once. It’s hard to see Kansas from across the Atlantic Ocean, though.
Somewhat gratuitous and condescending portrayal of the ‘rustica’ rejecting consensus science. Rice was there for the coup de grace, and it’s wonderful how ham-handed the butchery was.
=========
No different than an RI senator, Sheldon Whitehouse ( please dear lord, dont let that be an omen), being clueless to his home states hurricane history when using Sandy as an example of global warming. One clueless comment after another by people who are no better than peeping toms weatherwise.
Poor Prof was probably using Hansen adjusted GISS, which we all know has basically ZERO relationship to the actual recorded temperatures.
There is a consensus that over 95% of climate scientists would make the Brothers Grimm blush, as well as Al Gore. Now that’s an achievement.
We have to stop this madness of the crowds at some point but it seems to be getting worse again lately.
Peer Pressure and the Gravy Train (combined with a few who might believe very strongly) are the reasons for this.
How do we stop the Gravy Train? Someone has to cut-off the funding. Write your congressman. There is just too much funding available for this nonsense. Billions of dollars per year.
How do we stop the Peer Pressure? Reverse the effect. Send a copy of this article to everyone who works in the scientist’s department. Sure, Michael Mann is happy with Prof Rice but I’m sure there are others in his university department who will not look so kindly on such distortion. Maybe Prof Rice will think twice before doing it again. Maybe it is not worth it even if it comes from a $100,000 NAS grant. Do it every time we see another such distortion from another Train hopper. Take advantage of the Peer Pressure in the other direction.
Jim Rose says:
February 20, 2013 at 3:21 pm
Hi
The last four posts are simply ridicule of climate scientists — seemingly warranted. But enough is enough. This is not fun to read at all. More facts and analysis are desired. Please try to resist the temptation to heap contempt on one’s political opponents and stick closer to the science. I like this site but not the use of contempt.
Jim
Hi Jim,
I like your usefulness, but please try to have a clue.
JimRose, I’d be willing to bet that you own a tee shirt that says “Mean People Suck”. 😉
However, this “ridicule” that so upsets you consists mostly of applying facts to an inane utterence, and in any case, is richly deserved.
Another white collar alarmist trying to make a name for himself. After watching pathetic people like James Hansen & Mike Mann becoming famous, white collar alarmists are falling over themselves to get in the limelight.
It’s not just the money, think about the benefits of your very own Suzettes or Pachauri’s career advancement into literature. The possibilities are endless for talentless climate scientists.
Jim Rose says:
February 20, 2013 at 3:21 pm
Actually, Jim, I couldn’t discern Chuck’s political persuasion at all. Do you know which political party this “climate scientist” is affiliated with, or do you consider “climate scientist” to be a political party?
If so, their behavior is far more political than scientific and that justifies considerable derision by any thinking person.
The climate gravy train really is this bad, “science” of this sort is more than acceptable, it’s encouraged by the august warmist body’s that dish out the grants.
Money, money, money must be sunny in a warmist world!
The fact is Dear Jim that we are weary and contempt of so-called climate scientists who keep taking our taxes and mouthing nonsense. Contempt because the smallest amount of research would have highlighted the fact that his statement “temperatures clocked last year in the most recent dry spell have beaten historical records” is plain plumb wrong. Okay so Rice is an IPCC acolyte and has to follow the script but don’t expect those who pay his wages to uncritically accept “facts” dumped on unsuspecting (in this case Irish) readers. Throw $hit into the fan then thanks to web sites like this those making false claims are not going to emerge smelling of roses.
It seems Chuck was on the IPCC in 2007.
http://www.k-state.edu/media/mediaguide/bios/ricebio.html
Also
He also is one of five team leaders for a $20 million Kansas NSF EPSCoR project researching global climate change and renewable energy research. Rice leads the group that will use climate modeling strategies for adaption and mitigation.
Rice’s research has been supported by more than $30 million in grants from the U.S. departments of Agriculture and Energy, as well as the National Science Foundation and others
Now why does none of this surprise me ?
From the Profs linked bio: “He also is one of five team leaders for a $20 million Kansas NSF EPSCoR project researching global climate change and renewable energy research. Rice leads the group that will use climate modeling strategies for adaption and mitigation.”
Well of course Chuck has to report that temperature records were significantly broken in 2012. Without man-caused “climate change” there’d be no need for adaptation and mitigation and no money for Chuck’s research.
Jim Rose says:
“and stick closer to the science.”
The whole darn post is full of real data, that’s is what show the stupidity of the report in discussion.
How is that not “getting closer to science” ???
The number of useful idiots with PhD’s appears to be on the rise.
Jim Rose says:
“Please try to resist the temptation to heap contempt on one’s political opponents and stick closer to the science. ”
Sorry Jim, but in addition to providing good, solid, reproducible science on climate change, this site exposes gross scientific incompetence. Climate science is where these supposed ‘Climate Scientists’ (AKA useful idiots) fail miserably. These ‘Climate Scientists” aren’t political opponents as much as they are simply sock puppets that spout scientific nonsense (that supports an apparent political agenda). And for that, they bring derision upon themselves, and deserve whatever they get here and more.
Paul, thanks for the great link. It kind of tells us all we need to know.
‘Or does he think it is OK to make up “facts” as he goes along, so long as they suit his agenda? (Safe in the knowledge that our lame stream media are too useless and babyish to check and contradict).’
That one , plus talking AGW up is his job and provides lots of funding . No AGW and he kisses bye bye to lots of cash and status .
This travesty should be reported in the MSM. But, we know that this will not happen? One can only hope that some day soon a newspaper, magazine, a TV news channel or even a nation wide TV network will begin to give time for such stories. Until this happens we in the UK will suffer doom laden statements from our politicians. Such statements as “man made global warming is more of a threat than international terrorism.” Or “man made global warming is an established fact.” And this is, by and large what Joe Public believes.