Paging Chuck Rice at Kansas State – real data is calling you, collect

Oh Dear, Another Climate Scientist Makes A Fool Of Himself

Guest post by Paul Homewood

A farmer sifts through arid topsoil under a ruined crop on a farm last August in Kansas. Today the shortage of moisture on the land is threatening the new crop planted last autumn. photograph: getty

A farmer sifts through arid topsoil under a ruined crop on a farm last August in Kansas. Today the shortage of moisture on the land is threatening the new crop planted last autumn. photograph: getty

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)

image

image

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.

image

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

 

About these ads

94 thoughts on “Paging Chuck Rice at Kansas State – real data is calling you, collect

  1. 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

  2. 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.

  3. “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.

  4. 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

  5. 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.

  6. “■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.

  7. 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.
    =========

  8. 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.

  9. Poor Prof was probably using Hansen adjusted GISS, which we all know has basically ZERO relationship to the actual recorded temperatures.

  10. 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.

  11. 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.

  12. 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.

  13. 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.

  14. 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.

  15. 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.

    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.

  16. 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!

  17. 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.

  18. 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 ?

  19. 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.

  20. 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” ???

  21. 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.

  22. ‘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 .

  23. 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.

  24. I condone the outing of obvious intentionally misleading information. Out every darn one of them as possible and expose the truth they hide. The pervasive nature of things that continue to occur, and directly impact peoples opinions, should be vetted each and every time.

    Just look at the politics in the US and the half truths they all bring to the table as fact. It seems science has now entered the political and deception realm in full force.

    Just look at what the low information voters did to the US for the next 4 years. They will again fall prey to the same mantra the progressives/liberals/greenies emote over and over, but this time as victims of CAGW if nothing is done to counter the lies. At least the POTUS told the truth when he state that he would not raise taxes one dime. He didn’t, he did 2% for starters and got gas back to $4/gal, let alone the pull through costs attached to everything people purchase due to energy costs Quote “Necessarily skyrocketing”.

    I would place a wager that not one single climate scientist who preaches CAGW could pass a lie detector test, not one!

    Bring on the polygraph and let’s see who is truthful and who is just plain brainwashed.

    End of rant, everyone can take the rest of the week off now :-)

  25. He’s passing on popular, “generally known” opinions as facts, the sort of thing we used to do grousing around the watercooler. Now it is tweeted, blogged and interviewed, but the quality is no different.

    If Darwin were alive today, the fight for “consensus” science and what “everybody knows to be true, so I don’t have to verify it” would be a drama, indeed!

  26. The Irish Times piece was probably recycled from a UK newspaper who recycled it from somewhere else. All this is done by the ubiquitous journalist Phil Space

  27. “Is he simply incompetent? This seems unlikely, he would hardly be a Professor, if so.”

    I know others have already noted this statement, but this must be the most naive statement I have ever read on this site. I would argue that small academic institutions provide refuge for all kinds of incompetents.

  28. Jim Rose – I appreciate your concern, and wish that it were possible to keep strictly to the underlying climate science. Unfortunately, the goalposts keep shifting. First they gave us Global Warming, then it became Climate Change, then it became Extreme Weather Events, and goodness knows where it’s heading next. To score a goal, it’s no good aiming where the goalposts used to be. So, when ‘they’ get an Extreme Weather Event wrong, that’s what has to be addressed.

    However, I hope you will note that despite his obvious contempt for the appallingly low standards displayed in the offending article, Paul Homewood has kept very much to the facts of the matter, and has presented a very thorough, and thoroughly factual, analysis.

    Please also bear in mind that the offending article contained these words “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“. Paul Homewood has addressed that statement scientifically, with actual historical data applied to every reasonable interpretation. It is hard to see how he could have addressed it in any much better way.

  29. This disconnection from history is essential to climate alarmism, and to all the most pernicious fads and mass impulses. The New Man at Year Zero is allowed to refer to the past but never look at it.

  30. I can’t help but remember a couple of quotes from Idiocracy,

    Joe: I’m pretty sure what’s killing the crops is this Brawndo stuff.
    Secretary of State: But Brawndo’s got what plants crave. It’s got electrolytes.

  31. @ Jim Rose, on the contrary, I find it is ample time to plunge the nose of these loud mouths in their own juices. We can afterwards question their motives, but their words should be under scrutiny and exposed for what they are when they are blattantly false.

  32. Who’s to blame for such poor quality researchers with Ph.D.s? Their doctoral committee for such poor oversite, and journal editors for such poor quality control. If it is any measure of what we are getting from within the Ivory Towers, I refer you to the Whatworksclearinghouse website. Far more PUBLISHED studies are rejected rather than reviewed by that site. Shouldn’t that be the otherwayaround? If research is truly about quality, most studies that get published should be unimpeachable. That they are not also points the finger at us for continuing to fund such institutions of inferior merit.

  33. Hah, you can’t fool me! I just finished reading somewhere else on this very site that warmer air has more moisture. Therefore it wasn’t actually a drought. Nope. Couldn’t have been, since the air is more damp these days than it used to be.

    Seriously, I’d kinda like to hear the Prof explain his obviously incorrect and ideologically motivated statements.

    (PS… unrelated, but did anyone else notice al-Gore hosted a category on Jeopardy last night?)

  34. @Jim

    Turning a blind eye to any individual who perverts science is not the way to stop it. The facts have been presented again and again for years, which the CAGW-ists ignore as they continue to build their empires on the destruction of economies the world over. Chuck Rice is on that bandwagon. He’s out to make a buck and to spread misinformation and disrupt civilization. When would it be okay to get a tad upset about that?

  35. Posted Comment at the Irish TImes

    As a research engineer, I am appalled at Prof. Rice raising alarms directly contrary to historical evidence. This also shows lemming like support with a disgraceful lack of fact checking. 
    IPCC’s SREX, Dr. Roger Pielke Jr, and WUWT negate Prof. D. Wuebbles’ Climate Change alarms. See: http://ipcc-wg2.gov/SREX/ http://v.gd/NurpKp http://v.gd/GVv3mv 
     
    Reality checks are critically important in science and engineering – especially when we hear “chicken little” alarms. ALL IPCC’s four mean model projections have been much hotter than subsequent reality. i.e. an unaddress severe systematic Type B error. They do not provide credible engineering quality forecasts. For much closer analyses and temperature projections, see the Global WarmingPrediction Project and Nicola Scafetta 

    http://www.climateprediction.eu/ http://people.duke.edu/~ns2002/

  36. “(PS… unrelated, but did anyone else notice al-Gore hosted a category on Jeopardy last night?)”

    Hyperbole for 200 Alex.

  37. i believe that a new derogatory phrase is entering the scientific vocabulary.

    Its Climate Science.

    Perhaps it will even replace Lysenkoism.

    Eugene WR Gallun

  38. Peter Stroud says:
    February 20, 2013 at 4:27 pm
    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.
    ==================
    Factual reports such as this on the Internet carry weight. if only the weight of a straw, eventually enough straw will break the strongest camel.

    WUWT is read widely. Sent you elected representatives a letter telling them you don’t agree with further funding of nonsense. Ask for a copy of their voting record and an explanation of where they stand on the issue of giving more money.

  39. @ Jim; I would suggest you don’t come to WUWT unprepared. In your case I would recommend a hardhat, chest protector, and a cup!!! There must be a site where it is acceptable for so-called scientists are able to bulls&@t there science, but not here. We all await your reply. Make it strong!

  40. Was he referring to the whole year or just the summer months? I can’t tell from his quotes. How does 2012 in general look compared to 1934 and 1936?

  41. It is really difficult to understand why these ‘climate scientists’ persist in making claims of imminent catastrophe that even basic fact checking shows are false and misleading. They carry this message to even less ethical politicians who, as we have seen in the State of the Union address, use the advice of these ‘scientists’ as justification for their policies on energy and taxation.

    The result of this joint action by climate ‘scientists’ and politicians?:

    600,000 Households In Germany Without Power – “Increasing Energy Poverty Is Alarming”
    By P Gosselin on 23. Februar 2012
    Here’s Germany’s solution to saving energy and reducing its carbon foortprint- make electricity affordable only to a few rich people! German online DIE WELT daily has an article titled: Hundreds Of Thousands Have Had Their Power Turned Off.

    http://www.welt.de/wirtschaft/energie/article13879599/Hunderttausenden-Haushalten-wird-der-Strom-gesperrt.html

    Cold homes will kill up to 200 older people a day, warns Age UK
    Rising energy bills will put millions at risk from ‘fuel poverty gap’

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/oct/22/older-people-cold-energy-bills

    There are warnings of rolling power cuts and hugely rising energy prices – (they will necessarily sky rocket).

    So the result of these climate ‘scientists’ trying to make a name for themselves and increase their grant income is that people are actually dying right now of the cold. Note COLD not warm.

    I do not find people being forced to choose between heating and eating and dying of cold in ‘first world’ countries so a professor can get tenure or increased funding a simple ‘political matter’.

    This is a fundamental failure of scientific ethics.

  42. It is so obvious that the mainstream media is actively involved in misinformation. Newspeople that don’t tow the line are shunned and could find themselves unemployed. Lefties naturally gravitate to positions where they feel that they can actively influence public opinion. There is a natural selection process involved… selecting state power loving people. Without the $billions of free propaganda provided by the press, the statist Democratic party would rarely hold majorities at the federal level. Lies told by fellow “scientist” statists will never be “called out” by those in the press. The press isn’t lazy or incompetent, the “press” is actively involved in propagating these lies. The “propaganda press” is THE greatest threat to our personal freedoms.

  43. I have to admit that it still puzzles me that so many scientists from academia publish reports/papers with obvious errors and exaggerations that are rather easy to refute. Paul did a masterful job of collecting and proving that Mr Rice has numerous errors. I would really like the author to explain on this blog what appears to be gross errors.
    We have had a huge problem for years with politicans like Al Gore who either knowingly or un knowingly make wild claims regarding climate change and global warming just as the Sec of State did yesterday. Even the SOTU address was so short of facts with little correction by the media. The integrity of so many scientists and politicians has been shreaded especially with the attempts to ignore the pause in warming.
    Unfortunately not enough people have the exposure to see through what is going on at this time with the CAGW world, and the political agenda if sucessful could ruin the USA and other countries.

    When I started studying the CO2 claims in a skeptical way about 15 years ago, I was uncertain because of the many claims by so called top scientists. Something didn’t smell right, but I had a lot of trouble believing that so many were not honest. Similarly I had lots of friends that took a long time to come around and accept the convincing facts that I sent them from WUWT , they too had confidence in the scientists and the IPCC especially members of the Academies.

    Bottom line, it is extremely disappointing that so many scientists and academics have become so corrupted by the $$$ in global warming. The fact that they defended or were silent on the hockey stick took the cake. It appears they were so invested in a fraud and coud not get out gracefully. The communty of all honest scientists and engineers have lost the respect for the CAGW folks and the confidence in that community has been permanently damaged.
    Thank you Anthony and others for your tireless energy to get the truth out.
    Sending out information from you posts is very convincing to an open mind.

  44. @ jim Rose, climate science or this rubbish passed off as science, stopped being funny years ago.
    The decay within our governments that CAGW is a poster child for, should sicken every tax payer and civic minded person.
    Climatology has been clearly exposed as a scam disguised as a religion, cloaked in science for stealth advocacy purposes. No amount of evidence, no collapse of correlation and no amount of logic works on the faithful.
    The high priests keep moving the goal posts and lying, the faithful keep buying and the remedy remains the same. The cure for Global cooling, Catastrophic anthropogenic global warming, Climate Change, global climatic disruption and next weeks weather has at least been constant.
    The cure is for us non-believing heathens to give the righteous all our money and go back to the caves.Abandon our wealth and comfortable extended lives.
    The only cure for these delusional nitwits, who are the bulk of the enablers of this secular anti-humanist movement, is ridicule.
    Lots of ridicule, derision and contempt.
    Those so stupid that they willfully conspire to destroy civilization deserve to get what they work for, however most of us are better than that, so ridicule is the kindest treatment we can offer.
    When enough people are snickering at you, eventually you start to wonder why.
    Which of course was the intent of the PR campaign to dismiss any and all who questioned the cause as evil,uneducated, bottom feeders.
    What was that Fenton PR plan???

    Based on the media frenzy of lies and hysteria over weather, all the team has left is disinformation, which attracts ridicule, as that is the only sane response when confronted with pathological liars.

  45. Pamela Gray says:

    Who’s to blame for such poor quality researchers with Ph.D.s? Their doctoral committee for such poor oversite, and journal editors for such poor quality control. If it is any measure of what we are getting from within the Ivory Towers, I refer you to the Whatworksclearinghouse website. Far more PUBLISHED studies are rejected rather than reviewed by that site. Shouldn’t that be the otherwayaround? If research is truly about quality, most studies that get published should be unimpeachable. That they are not also points the finger at us for continuing to fund such institutions of inferior merit.

    Pamela unfortunately such poor quality has permeated almost all levels of our society, not only the Ivory Towers, it the local news people not being able to pronounce the local town names to a President that unable to pronounce corpsman. Editors that think a virus and a bacterium is the same thing. To electricians who cannot correctly connect a two way switch to light so they work correctly. We have people in jobs with such a basic lack of knowledge even for their jobs that they endanger us all, yet most of the population do not even know or care how bad things really are.

  46. Anthony, you are not a real scientist so you don’t understand his super magic science process!

    REPLY: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. – Clarke’s 3rd law

  47. Rice most likely deserves the derision he is receiving here. But wouldn’t the article be more effective as journalism if the author had at least tried to contact Rice for comment before publishing it? It would be constructive to discover what source Rice got his “data” from and how he views the contrary data presented here. Give him a chance to double-down his statement or to publicly retract it. Call him to account; accountability is the ally of truth.

  48. Perhaps he was not referring to records in the state of Kansas, but in the contiguous US, where his statement is perfectly accurate. At no point in the article does it specify what region he’s referring to, and he could very easily have been speaking in terms of the US in general, rather than at a state level.

    Just, y’know, throwing that out there. Doesn’t seem to have occurred to anyone else, thought I might mention it.

  49. I am envious of those WUWT readers enjoying the requisite scientific background to dissect Rice’s comments and authors of similar published papers.

    I deal with own frustrations toward ‘professorial malpractice’ by tracking down the email address of the offending professor. Then, sending him/her a link to the respective WUWT posting with a recommendation to respond to the derisive comments the professor has now sowed. CC’d are the professor’s department heads and co-authors, pointing out my ‘new found concern’ over the knock to their own respective reputations and the school’s credibility and standing. Hopefully a lesson that you’re not going to get away with stupidity and P.S., GO K-STATE! for that last bit disingenuous ‘we’re all on the same team.’

    No, I don’t receive appreciate responses in return for my good deeds. But, I sleep well with some small consolation that for a while I’ve set in motion a noticed increase in steamy ears and tight sphincters over at the political back-knifing cesspool of the faculty lounge.

  50. the drought is connected not only with temperature, but mostly with levels of the moisture. We must compare number of days without rain, not only temperature, so Chuck Rice may be right about record drought?

  51. Please get with the agenda, history and science only started in 1984, before that was waste land, wilderness and dragons. War is peace, today we thank big brother for the increase in the chocolate ration. We also thank him for the wonderful carbon taxes creating clean and cheaper power. Thank you big brother. Once upon a time I believed that a Loon was a type of bird, now I am unsure, this man is in Forrest Gump territory, stupid is as stupid does, my god.

  52. I’ve seen no end of professorial wrongheadedness, but getting very basic data wrong in one’s own field–even a secondary field of study–is fairly rare. Mistakes tend to be at least a little more complicated, unless they’re simple brain farts. Even uncurable dunces who make it through graduate school manage at least to reach a more sophisticated level of stupidity. The really basic mistakes do happen, but it’s not the way to bet. Consequently, you really have to track down the quote and the context, before you can be sure that the speaker was actually as boneheaded as it seemed.

    Ignotas says:
    February 21, 2013 at 12:07 am

    the drought is connected not only with temperature, but mostly with levels of the moisture. We must compare number of days without rain, not only temperature, so Chuck Rice may be right about record drought?

    Maybe so, but the quote was specifically about temperature.

    Sam Yates says:
    February 20, 2013 at 10:15 pm

    Perhaps he was not referring to records in the state of Kansas, but in the contiguous US, where his statement is perfectly accurate. At no point in the article does it specify what region he’s referring to, and he could very easily have been speaking in terms of the US in general, rather than at a state level.

    That’s a whole lot more likely. It’s true, the IrishTimes story has nothing in the quote, or the text, to indicate that the quote referred to Kansas. But it is easy to get this impression upon reading the article. Drought conditions were widespread, so talking about regional, or perhaps nationwide temperatures, would make at least as much sense as talking about just Kansas temperatures.

    Actually, we don’t even know that Rice was talking about Kansas, although I’d like to think so…one would hope that the IrishTimes would careful enough to find quotes about the same topic as the story in which they are used, or else to clarify as needed.

    As before, I’m reserving judgement until I see an original quote, with context (if that ever happens). But at the moment, the suspicion that a pile of drought-dried prairie grass somehow got assembled into a giant strawman is getting harder to ignore.

  53. The propagandist believing his own propaganda. Same as Germany during the 30’s and early 40’s.
    Still reports of our CO2 input into the atmosphere as a mass. This ignores the fact that nature produces 30 times more CO2 than we do and we cannot stop nature.

  54. Matt N

    Was he referring to the whole year or just the summer months? I can’t tell from his quotes. How does 2012 in general look compared to 1934 and 1936?

    1934 as a whole was 58.5F, compared to 57.8F last year.

  55. Don

    Give him a chance to double-down his statement or to publicly retract it. Call him to account; accountability is the ally of truth.

    I’ve asked Chuck for comments, still waiting for a reply.

  56. “…a climate change expert…”

    It would be a propos to point out there are no “climate change experts”, only climate change speculators. Anyone assuming themselves to be a climate change expert is more into self-agrandisement than science.

  57. @Robertson

    All well said. Thanks for typing.

    @ignotus

    The drought issue was already examined here. It was much worse during the dust bowl. The crop losses were higher.

    Readers may have forgotten that there were lots of “born in sin” blamers of human action in those days too. When I was young we were taught that the dust bowl was caused by inappropriate farming practices like ploughing.

    With more temperature BS than ever making the rounds we see ever more frequent moments of Rice-and-shine. Rather than letting the sun shine in, however, it is more like a mooning.

    /cheek

  58. The trash reporting of AGW believers has enabled the trash work of AGW hypesters to make false public claims with impunity.
    In the same vein, NPR recently (Monday?) ran a morning piece that condescendingly asserted that meteorologists are too ignorant to understand climate and that if only yet another well funded group of non-scientist, well funded academics could explain the AGW crisis they are obsessed with a little more clearly, well by golly they would finally get the message.
    But what is really going to take place is that increasingly anyone- even those who simply demand good data and sound reasoning- will be pushed out of the public square by the little cowardly AGW fanatics.
    Pielke, jr. has just experienced this.

  59. If you don’t read the newspaper
    you are uninformed, if you do
    read the newspaper you are
    misinformed. — Mark Twain

    Nothing could be truer than the Irish Times, a position which does not happen by accident but by design. I personally refuse to read anything in it than the Sports pages, as its writers have demonstrated time and time again that they are pursuing their own agendas. Despite this, the majority of Irish people, who considered themselves informed and educated, swear by it, with the obvious results. So it is absolutely no accident that such an article would appear in the Irish Times, another example would be:

    Advocacy journalism completely dominates, the journalist promoting his or her cause with the result that the reader is most certainly not presented with the facts and left to draw his or her own conclusions. For instance I was working in China in late 2011, when the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change was holding its big conference in Durban. Reading the China Daily newspaper on the 6th December, it was reported that China was open to a legally binding climate deal, which would come into effect post 2020. However, there were five preconditions, as was reported elsewhere, these included that a review of climate science should be finished by 2015, and that established principles in which historical responsibility for creating the problem of climate change, and the respective capacity of countries to fight it, would be respected.

    I knew that if I logged onto the Irish Times website there would be no mention of the review of climate science. Sure enough, it wasn’t, instead a banner headline on “China ready for legally binding climate deal”, with repeated references to a deal by 2015 and no mention of China’s preconditions and a timeframe strictly post 2020.

    One could also point out that the Irish Times’ Senior Environmental Correspondent Frank McDonald was only back from Durban when he was writing in Nature, which once had the reputation as a scientific publication, about the ‘breakthrough’ at the conference, “but it is improbable that this will save the world” and “how there have been dark forces at work over the years”. Many people consider the Irish Times as the paper of record in Ireland and the principle of the Irish Times Trust is to publish:

    • “Free from any form of personal or party political, commercial, religious or other sectional control”.

    However, there are no measures in place to ensure that this happens. In fact the paper ran a bitter and nasty campaign against a major gas development in the North West of Ireland. As the I and others were appalled at this campaign, we documented the false information, which was being published, and lodged a formal complaint with the Press Ombudsman. As the cost of taking a court action in Ireland are so high, in 2003 the legal advisory group on defamation, established by the Minister for Justice, recommended in its report that the defamation laws be reformed and a statutory press council be established. Instead we got an industry self regulator, who when he received the documentation that myself and others presented, issued used with new unpublished procedures, completely different and opposite to the official and published procedures, in order to justify why he wouldn’t have to take action.

    Finally, the latest I [heard] in relation to Frank McDonald, their chief environmental columnist, although I haven’t verified it myself, is that he is a History graduate with no scientific qualifications. He also has a real attitude problem, when the city centre region of Dublin reduced its speed limit to 30 kph, Frank was on the radio in a disparaging manner to the AA motoring correspondent, who was pointing out that many drivers actually find it difficult to maintain attention at such a low speed. It turned out that when he was asked by the same motoring correspondent if he actually drove a car himself, he had to reply in the negative – he had no driving license.

  60. Repeating my favorite quote for the 54,658th time.

    From the 1938 WPA Guide to Kansas:

    “Recent years of almost unprecedented drought have led to the often expressed belief that the climate of Kansas is changing. Geologists and meteorologists, however, point out that weather runs in cycles, the most pronounced being about a third of a century in length. Conditions during a cycle are easily mistaken by laymen for permanent changes. Despite year by year fluctuations in temperature and precipitation, recorded evidence shows that general climatic conditions remain unchanged.”

    At that time the experts were scientific and the people were superstitious. Now it’s the other way around.

  61. Now I’m embarrassed to say I’m a K-State alum.

    It appears the social sciences there have infiltrated the hard sciences. I remember a professor back the seventies who’s first words were: “Everything you know about modern day society is f *&ked up.”

  62. First the U of I guy yesterday, then the K-State guy and the Harvard guy today. Maybe there’s enough of them to do a “Professor of Climate Ideology (and not the facts)” of the day post?

  63. I sent professor Rice the following e-mail to see if he responds.

    =====================

    Professor Rice,

    I was reading a blog, Watts Up With That, the most viewed science blog on the web, and saw this storey in which you were the topic.

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/02/20/paging-chuck-rice-at-kansas-state-real-data-is-calling-you-collect/#comment-1229551

    The subject is about your interview in an Irish Times article which writes:
    “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.”

    And you are quoted as saying:
    “The records weren’t just slightly broken; they were significantly higher,”

    The WUWT article is ridiculing you for exaggerating the “records”. Do you have the “records” to substantiate your claim?

    I thought you might want to defend your claim in order to avoid more ridicule. I am a K-State alum and felt the need to defend the integrity of the university.

    Sincerely,

    DCA 1978

  64. I noticed that classes are cancelled today at K-State due to a snow storm so Prof Rice should have plenty of time to defend his claims.

    The Gore effect??? ;-)

    I saw this pic on the Drudge Report’s main page this morning. It’s my niece walking in the snow yesterday at Friends University here in Wichita.

    http://www.drudgereport.com/

  65. As a 1968 KSU physics graduate, I am disturbed. I am praying that there are some cautious, skeptical, non alarmist influences on campus. KSU was the very epicenter of cautiousness and conservativeness (the old meaning of conservative..). Some balance would be nice, but it seems wanting in our current world. How can you not accept the millions of dollars to further your beliefs? It seems a disgusting incestuous arrangement. We need to get the government out of all this stuff, but I don’t see how anymore….. I think a tipping point has been reached. All downhill from here. Very sad. WUWT and the like are the only bright lites it seems.

  66. Sad.

    Thanks for the black eye.

    What is even more pathetic is that the State’s Climatologist is at K-State.
    Kansas State Climatologist’s Office
    Weather Data Library
    211 Umberger Hall
    Manhattan, KS 66506-3402
    785-532-7019

    And the offices are within walking distance.

  67. DCA – you ought to send to the President of our beloved University.

    So much for turning the University into a top 50 Research Institution.

  68. Owing to predicted 18″ of snow… “Kansas State University announced on its website that Thursday classes were canceled.”

  69. Jim Rose says:
    February 20, 2013 at 3:21 pm

    …..The last four posts are simply ridicule of climate scientists — seemingly warranted…..
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    These are articles countering propaganda.

    Given that academics are making up “facts” and using them for ‘peer-reviewed’ papers such as Lewandowsky’s bear-baiting behavior and even calling for our trials and deaths ~ University of Graz Responds to Parncutt’s calls for death penalty for “deniers” what do you expect us to do kiss their rosy red rectums? There are people DYING as a result of this vile propaganda. In the UK alone it ” works out at 65 deaths a day.” Yet Hansen and the rest want to export this death by fuel poverty and starvation to the rest of the world.

    It is even happening here in the USA. We already have an unemployment rate of about 23% The “Green Energy companies funded with tax payer dollars are going bankrupt at an alarming rate So far, [thats] 34 companies

    …The 2009 stimulus set aside $80 billion to subsidize politically preferred energy projects. Since that time, 1,900 investigations have been opened to look into stimulus waste, fraud, and abuse (although not all are linked to the green-energy funds), and nearly 600 convictions have been made. Of that $80 billion in clean energy loans, grants, and tax credits, at least 10 percent has gone to companies that have since either gone bankrupt or are circling the drain….

    As Obama Promised: Energy Prices to Soon Skyrocket

    Obama’s war on coal hits your electric bill
    The market-clearing price for new 2015 capacity – almost all natural gas – was $136 per megawatt. That’s eight times higher than the price for 2012, which was just $16 per megawatt. In the mid-Atlantic area covering New Jersey, Delaware, Pennsylvania, and DC the new price is $167 per megawatt. For the northern Ohio territory served by FirstEnergy, the price is a shocking $357 per megawatt…. These are not computer models or projections or estimates. These are the actual prices that electric distributors have agreed to pay for new capacity. The costs will be passed on to consumers at the retail level.

    Another way of looking at the cost:

    GENERATING TECHNOLOGIES…….. PRICE
    …………………………………………(CENTS PER kWh)
    CONVENTIONAL………………………. COAL 3.79
    “CLEAN COAL”………………………… (IGCC) 4.37
    NATURAL GAS…………………………………… 5.61
    NUCLEAR………………………………………….. 5.94
    BIOMASS…………………………………………….5.95
    WIND………………………………………………….6.64
    SOLAR THERMAL………………………………18.82
    SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC…………………….37.39
    source: Hard Facts

    The EPA and Department of Energy drastically underestimated the effects of the new EPA rulings. Many more plants are closing than anticipated. This means electricity prices will sky rocket and the electric grid could become unstable New Regulations to Take 34 GW of Electricity Generation Offline and the Plant Closing Announcements Keep Coming… According to EPA, …. these regulations will only shutter 9.5 GW of electricity generation capacity. OOPS, I guess the government miscalculated.

    A power systems engineer commented here on WUWT stated:

    “Letting non-professionals get involved in the power grid is like giving the keys to the family car and a bottle of whiskey to a 14 year old boy and his pals. If the renewables were viable, we’d adopt them by the train-load and build them so fast your head would spin.”

    What the politicians neglect to say is their plan for making this work is to install Smart Meters, an attractive opportunity for Investors This theoretically allows residential electricity to be turned off so the system can be balanced as wind and solar power surges and declines. Of course with renewables bankrupting, smart meters not installed and coal plants closing at three time the rate expected, this put a real big kink in that plan.

    However BP and ENRON who Invented The Global Warming Industry were well aware of that and knew gas would be the last man standing.

    Energy InSight FAQs

    ….Rolling outages are systematic, temporary interruptions of electrical service.
    They are the last step in a progressive series of emergency procedures that ERCOT follows when it detects that there is a shortage of power generation within the Texas electric grid. ERCOT will direct electric transmission and distribution utilities, such as CenterPoint Energy, to begin controlled, rolling outages to bring the supply and demand for electricity back into balance.They generally last 15-45 minutes before being rotated to a different neighborhood to spread the effect of the outage among consumers, which would be the case whether outages are coordinated at the circuit level or individual meter level. Without this safety valve, power generating units could overload and begin shutting down and risk causing a domino effect of a statewide, lengthy outage. With smart meters, CenterPoint Energy is proposing to add a process prior to shutting down whole circuits to conduct a mass turn off of individual meters with 200 amps or less (i.e. residential and small commercial consumers) for 15 or 30 minutes, rotating consumers impacted during that outage as well as possible future outages.

    There are several benefits to consumers of this proposed process. By isolating non-critical service accounts (“critical” accounts include hospitals, police stations, water treatment facilities etc.) and spreading “load shed” to a wider distribution, critical accounts that happen to share the same circuit with non-critical accounts will be less affected in the event of an emergency. Curtailment of other important public safety devices and services such as traffic signals, police and fire stations, and water pumps and sewer lifts may also be avoided.

    Even Uber-green Germany has finally seen the oncoming economic crash at the end of the tunnel and has twenty three-new coal-fired power plants… under construction in Germany, because Germany is worried about the increasing cost of electricity

  70. Interestingly, comparing the annual temperatures at Concordia, you get

    2012 – 56.4F
    1934 – 57.6F

    So, even with the mild winter last year, 1934 was still warmer.

  71. Like Kenny Henriksen, a crop and livestock farmer in Jewell County, Kansas my father was too in the 1930’s and left in 1939. Stories from my Dad was that some rain fell and they would quickly run a cultivator to throw the wet dirt onto the plant roots. At the end of the season they would have a mound up to 12″ high. What drove many off the land was the selling price of corn was so low, most could not meet the mortgage payments and not so much the low yields.
    When we visited in August, 1970, the creek bed on the farm had water standing and deer tracks. He didn’t remember that from when he was a kid.

    I also have a problem with this statement.
    “In the heartland of the US that is the prevailing view among many because we have these cycles all the time,” said Rice. “But our analysis over 100 years shows we are seeing longer growing periods, with earlier springs and later falls. With a longer growing season you are going to need more water.”

    As a soil microbiology Phd, has he ever heard of “Growing Degree Days” for corn? Since there will not be two crops a season, it will take less time for the corn to mature, so the growing season will be shorter not longer. http://ohioline.osu.edu/agf-fact/0101.html

    Additionally there are spikes in the temperature. When born on the farm in June 1923 it was so hot, Grandpa put him down on the floor unwrapped and fan him to keep cool.

  72. Gail Combs says:
    February 21, 2013 at 9:17 am

    Gail Combs, I’ve been reading lately (sorry, can’t remember where, except I’m pretty sure Benny Peiser’s newsletter has covered it several times) that the biggest reason coal-fired generating plants have been shutting down is that they can’t compete with natural gas, which has gotten ridiculously cheap from fracking. Seems many have converted to natural gas. Have you run across this? If you could find a few reliable sources, it wld. be much appreciated – you always seem to have great sources.

  73. Is he simply incompetent? This seems unlikely, he would hardly be a Professor, if so.

    Laying on the irony a bit thick there, aren’t we Paul?

  74. As written above…
    Louis, well stated, here here !

    Louis Hooffstetter says:
    February 20, 2013 at 4:19 pm
    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.

  75. Pamela Gray says:
    February 20, 2013 at 5:29 pm
    Who’s to blame for such poor quality researchers with Ph.D.s ?

    Pamela – I’m trying [to] be “PC” here, but by my observation, there is two ways to navigate the academic system in recent times. 1) is traditional, but 2) is via “playing” the system by sucking up to its beliefs – which currently run with the “green” agenda and the funds (grants, etc.) that this movement has brought into play for academia and like minded research projects.

    Right now the system is corrupted with leftist thinking on both the academic and government sides.

    It has been compromised. Sorry, no other way to put it…

  76. Droughts (and record high temperatures) don’t only occur during the summer. The drought in Kansas has been going on for some time now.

    The same “Climate at Glance” source used in the top post shows that 2012 ranked as the hottest year on record for Kansas (Jan-Dec average). The quote above does say “temperatures clocked last year“, not “last summer” or “last July”.

    Now, 2012 was only slightly warmer than the next warmest year, so “significantly warmer” may be a bit of a stretch, but it was still the warmest year.

Comments are closed.