I’m sure Phil Jones will need to be notified right away that this paper on HadCRUT4 was never actually published.
Justin Templer writes on Twitter and provides screencaps:
Meet @ForecastFacts campaign manager and degreed environmentalist @emilyrsouthard clueless about HadCRUT
From her Twitter feed
and then later, there was this gem:
While some people might agree, I don’t think it means what she thinks it means. How embarrassing.
Who is Emily Southard? Her Linked in profile says:
These are the sorts of low information activists that are bullying weathercasters and TV meteorologists into saying what the activists want them to say about climate.
Be sure to tell you own local TV weathercaster or meteorologist to watch out for these folks, since they are obviously clueless.
*blinks* Okay, I’m instantly lost. MoveOn.org is anti-HadCRUT ?
And earlier today, David Suzuki declared himself to be anti-immigration. Did something cosmic happen today that I missed?
I really don’t understand why you give exposure to irrational idiots like this.
I suppose someone has to say it. Emily sounds like a real twit.
Sorry.
What a fool. Glad she’s on THEIR side, lol.
@007 because if I don’t nobody will know just how irrational these idiots are.
007 says:
July 11, 2013 at 6:54 pm
> I really don’t understand why you give exposure to irrational idiots like this.
It’s not exposure, it’s documentation and ensuring that what you say on the ‘net lives forever.
Aw, come ON, Bond, James Bond (007 above) — that’s easy!
Because it is SO MUCH FUN! #[:)]
Okay, let’s see if Ric Werme and I post at the same time again….
Ric! Where were you?!
Maybe things have changed since she graduated, but Connecticut College seems to have a degree in “Environmental Studies,” not “Environmental Science.” Minor technicality in name, but it helps to get your major right when you’re trying to use it in an argument.
Doesn’t exactly read like a rigorous program in “climate science,” to say the least
http://www.conncoll.edu/academics/majors-departments-programs/academic-programs/environmental-studies/courses/
I am sure I’ve studied at least as much “climate science” during my environmental engineering degree programs. On top of that, I had rigorous math and stats courses – something clearly lacking from too many of the so-called “climate scientists.”
Her cluelessness regarding HadCRUT is quite amusing. I like how she found the means to attack it thanks to “I googled HadCRUT” and a write-up from SkepitcalScience.
Actually she has a point – according to Phil Jones, nobody who peer reviewed his papers ever asked him to produce method or data. So in a very real sense, his papers have not been peer reviewed – pal reviewed maybe…
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18599-climategate-scientist-questioned-in-parliament.html
Should they rename it to PushOver.org?
And the Lord said, “Let there be crackpots.”
And there were crackpots.
“These are the sorts of low information activists that are bullying weathercasters and TV meteorologists into saying what the activists want them to say about climate.
Be sure to tell you own local TV weathercaster or meteorologist to watch out for these folks, since they are obviously clueless.”
They’re clueless ’cause they don’t check out WUWT, CA, B-H, JoNova, NFC,…
Aren’t you s’posed to know your enemy?
Bob Tisdale: … and there were crackpots…
..and it was good…for a laugh
Ahem. Mr. Worrall, #[:)]
We agree with her conclusion. We are ridiculing the irony of her saying it.
And sneering at her abysmal ignorance of the meaning of what comes out of her mouth.
Yes, yes, Mr. Worrall, she IS pretty… . (smile)
I think she has gotten datasets confused. We know that after all the adjustments and manipulations it is GISS that is bunk science.
Most Environmental “Science” B.S. degrees are nearly worthless and almost all Environmental “Studies” B.S. programs are completely worthless. Maybe a step up from Communications or Business but not much. Usually they have very little in the way of real science of math courses and often are taught by extreme “watermelons” from the social sciences. I can’t speak to graduate programs in these areas. I’m sure they are a bit better but probably still not much science. Phil Jones can’t even fit a straight line in Excel so I am guessing his degrees are in Env. “Science”
She hasn’t learned her lesson yet, I wonder how long she will continue before she experiences some peer review firsthand by her bosses at @ForecastFacts
Bill_W,
Conn College’s program actually has two different tracks: (1) natural science and (2) social science.
The natural science track has two different stat courses as math options.
The general ed requirements require either a 100-level comp sci class, a 100- or 200-level math class, a philosophy class, or a 12X frosh seminar class (currently limited to “robotics and problem solving”).
It appears that you can get a 4-yr environmental studies degree without taking a single math class (unless possibly one is a pre-requisite for a required class).
Based on her educational and career background I’d say she’s chosen to marinate in deep stupid all her adult life and her ‘climate studies’ program was a couple years of crackpot catechism.
So, judging by her Linked In profile, one could safely say:
Those who can, do. Those who can’t, become Community Organizers for MoveOn, Green Corps. and O for A? With an added splash of “do as I say and not as I do” for good measure?
Question, do you think she took the Natural Science or the Social Science Track in Environmental Studies at Connecticut College? Plus, do you think it was the Major or the Minor route..
Hey, I studied Physics in tech. school, that doesn’t make me a Professor in Physics.
But I once stayed in a Holiday Inn, does that count?
And after all that Phil Jones could do, HadCRUT 4 is going down. Down, down, down. You know, “down”, as in “not up”. It’s almost like CO2 doesn’t matter much.
This cooling thing, what is causing it Mr IPCC? Could it be you are wrong? Could it be we don’t need to be inflicted with $trillions in tax servitude for a lie?
HadCRUT4 was fabricated for one reason: because version 3 didn’t show sufficient global warming: see the difference?
What got her going? Did a Skeptic quote the HADcrut data? And did she need a quick way to refute their argument?
After rolling around laughing at Tisdale’s comment, “Let there be crackpots,” I sat back and thought about all the dumb mistakes I myself have made, in my time. Mercy and pity crept into my thoughts.
When in my teens I used to be a sidekick for some of the most dangerous “father figures” you can imagine. (Sort of like the the little yappy dog prancing along beside the big bulldog “Spike” in old Warner Brothers cartoons.) They advised me to do dumb things and take dumb stands, and I did what they said, seeking approval.
Perhaps “Moveon.org is the “Spike,” and this person is the little sidekick.
The real test is: Can this person learn?
Guessing she had to find a way to “disprove” the “world hasn’t warmed since ____ according to HadCRUT” claim.
The thing people forget when considering IQ scores is that IQ 100 is the population average – there are many, many people below IQ 100… 🙂
Does not truth and fact trump the other option eventually?
Just saying,,,,,,,,,,
@JoeSquawk is Joe Kernen, who is one of the co-hosts of CNBC’s early morning show Squawk Box. He has had the temerity recently to express skepticism about AGW on air. The Moveon crowd has targeted him for their “isolate and ridicule” approach. “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Hang in there Joe.
Mating season for social media Twits means navigating by IFR– not aviation’s Instrument Flight Rules but those of Move.On’s Invisible Flying Rabbits.
“Against stupidity, the gods themselves are helpless.”
Studied climate science; just discovered HadCRUT for the first time. Oh dear…
It is well known that if a academic discipline has the word “science” as part of its name, then it is *NOT* a science. Those are the disciplines that suffer from “science envy,” wishing for, but never achieving the rigor, trustworthiness, and cachet of actual science. For example: political science, social science, climate science, environmental science, etc. Indeed, if one replaces the word “science” with the word “advocacy” the names become accurate: political advocacy, social advocacy, climate advocacy, environmental advocacy, etc.
Disciplines that are actually sciences have names like: physics, chemistry, biology, ecology, medicine, limnology, astronomy, geology, etc. While the absence of the word “science” in the name does not guarantee that the discipline reliably practices science (e.g. astrology, economics), the presence of the word “science” in the name is a guarantee that the discipline does not reliably practice science.
Whatever it is that she did study, it does not seem to have included studying the difference between “there” and “their”.
Sorry. First thing that comes to mind to me is: Computer Science
Definitely a science.
Your can get an Environmental Studies degree for $58,780/year. The science option for the degree may produce graduates that are trainable. I’m not sure about the social science option. Most of the course description is touchy-feely stuff with no backbone. The degree and course descriptions don’t sound very promising for anything but turning out environmental activists. This young lady sounds like she did well in saving the planet and wasn’t around much that gave her any science or engineering tools to do that. I’ve hired a number of environmental degree types over the years. The good ones only take a year or so of intense training to be useful. I don’t think this young lady would do well in the “real” environmental world.
Dear Emily fills the role described below.
The most dangerous people in the world, are people who “mean well” (do gooders). Unfortunately they have no concept of “The Law of Unintended Consequences”. This law says that well meaning actions, not thought through, can have quite different and disastrous consequences.
Emilys’ CV makes her perfect for the role.
I firmly believe that a lack of immediate negative consequences for foolish actions have developed this lack of common sense evident in so many.
UnfrozenCavemanMD says:
July 11, 2013 at 8:58 pm
It is well known that if a academic discipline has the word “science” as part of its name, then it is *NOT* a science.
Reminds me of a quote in Scientific American from the 70s (when it still did report some science)
“Computer Science is to science what plumbing is to hydrodynamics”
This is the tweet that makes me mad “@JoeSquawk and if ur not part of the solution or accurate reporting, @CNBC should reconsider your employment.” Typical Alinsky tactics just like GeneDoc said.
@Bill_W -\
As the holder of an MBA along with a PhD in another field, I must differ with the thought that business is a worthless subject. Because business fails quickly if it falls for the sort of irrationality that is killing science and the humanities, theories analogous to CAGW don’t hold up for very long, because their proponents soon crash and burn. That is at least some constraint on academic madness. In business, you have to get it right or you’re out of business (crony capitalists, like der Fuehrer’s bedmates, may look like they are “getting it right,” but fraud and larceny are not business but an entirely different kind of discipline).
If you follow Ms. Southard’s twitter feed upward, you’ll find a link to this SkepticalScience article by Kevin C:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/hadcrut4_analysis_and_critique.html
“However in the course of examining the data for these articles I have come across a number of features which are of interest in understanding the data and do not seem to have been widely reported. Some of these features are (at least to me) rather unexpected. Note however that this material is the result of a few months of spare-time effort, and has not been subject to the scrutiny of peer-review, and so should be treated as tentative. It is likely that at least some of it is wrong. Constructive criticism and pointers to any previous similar work I have missed are welcome.”
Give her an “F” for reading comprehension.
That she had to Google what HadCRUT was is indeed precious.
That she thought it was some crazy denier idea was also precious.
Yeah, ‘Environmental Science/Climate Science’… “scientists all agree this is warming, and warming at an alarming rate, so let’s talk about how to solve this”, “here’s how CO2 warms, with this handy dandy PowerPoint explaining it”. Read peer reviewed papers that disagree? Review said papers? No. Take a math class or stats 100 class? Maybe. Apply statistical methods to data in her field? No. She probably just did problem sets and take a final. Welcome to LAS undergrad.
Well, the syllogism she is using must be pretty simple.
Peer reviewed consensus science indicates dangerous warming.
HadCRUT 4 does not show significant warming for the last 16 years.
———————————-
Therefore HadCRUT 4 is not peer reviewed.
Including one more premise, namely “HadCRUT 4 is peer reviewed” only makes the whole damned logical construct inconsistent, what is good for nothing but feeding the merchants of doubt.
Facts should never be checked anyway, but forecasted. Sounds good?
Re: tgorn
> Sorry. First thing that comes to mind to me is: Computer Science
> Definitely a science.
As somebody who has a Computer Science degree I would have to disagree. There was a maths requirement but not a statistics one. Laboratory and experimental work didn’t exist – it was writing code. There is no form of observational measurement, analysis and conclusions to be drawn.
Computer Science is more of a technical degree than a science degree
Perhaps a big list of climate related studies which are not really peer reviewed ie: where studies get special treatment due to journal members adding their names to dodgy studies to get them published, ‘communicated’ papers, ‘pal review’ where sympathetic journal members shepherd papers into publication by using sympathetic reviewers, etc.
Some so called studies should never have been published, and would never have made it without ‘special treatment’ from unethical helpers.
Friendly Fire. Warmunist movement in chaos. Lack of warming showing in their own datasets leads to collateral damage. The general is gone. Carry on warmunists.
TerryS says:
July 12, 2013 at 12:08 am
“Re: tgorn
> Sorry. First thing that comes to mind to me is: Computer Science
> Definitely a science.
As somebody who has a Computer Science degree I would have to disagree. There was a maths requirement but not a statistics one.”
Maybe in your computer science degree.
JohnB says:
July 11, 2013 at 7:17 pm
…. They’re clueless ’cause they don’t check out WUWT, CA, B-H, JoNova, NFC,…
Aren’t you s’posed to know your enemy?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Not in this case. If they have no competing agenda and a few brain cells to rub together they would probably end up as skeptics if they read and study those sites. That is why we have loony lew and co. cooking up idiotic studies showing skeptics are nuts.
Much much better to tell your adoring disciples we are dens of inequity, post a few twisted out of recognition tidbits from the sites to trash at their paid for sites and then feed them talking points to spew in the
General Propaganda OutletsMSM.Remember the whole idea is to CONTROL information so the general population is ignorant and unthinking.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you…
….then it pretty much stays at laughing to be honest if this is the kind of razor sharp intellect we’re up against.
I’m still getting my head around the fact that Greenpeace were so willingly lackadaisical with the facts yesterday that they willingly lied to all of their would be supporters regarding the design inspiration behind the Shard – and worse, a lie so easily checked within 10 seconds on Google.
Awesome.
Typical. If something doesn’t agree with the “facts” that you “know”, it must therefore be a big-oil funded lie.
Wasn’t moveon created to keep George W. Bush from winning a second term? Isn’t their entire reason to exist moot? Can you imagine actually telling anyone you’re associated with moveon? To quote Bill Engvall, it’s a good thing you can’t actually die from embarrassment… there’d be teenage girls dying every time they were in public with their dads.
And to bring the rant full circle, I don’t have a degree, and am constantly having to explain everything, from the most basic to the most complex, about computers and programming to twits with degrees. True story: I once had to explain the concept of a “for” loop in C to a 20-something that had a degree in programming… sigh.
I encountered a UK version of this the other day on FB – I replied to a FB friend’s image of the flowers in her garden with a reamark about how backward everything is this year where i live. This total imbecile claiming to be a full time climate activist chimed in with a post about AGW and how he is saving the world. A few exhanges later, he was ranting at me about Holocaust Deniers, how ashamed I should be not be helping save the planet by destroying carbon, and parroting a load of ReaClimate rubbish about my conformation bias, in response to my measured remarks about flatlining temps and advice to study the work of Bob Tisdale, Lief Svalgaard, Piers Corbyn, Steve McIntyre, Jo Nova etc etc.
He clearly had no comprehension of scientific method, maths, statistics etc etc – and no wish to learn any. This is sadly the kind of person being churned out by our educations systems: full of prosletiszing zeal and bereft of basic knowledge or ability to reason from eveidence.. The fact I spent my life as a professional researcher who would have been out of business without the ability to find and evaluate accurate material, and that I’d been studying the climate / Agw dispute in depth for at least 12 years, meant nothing to him.
It was profoundly depressing, since there are so many of these people and they ARE listened to, in some quarters. They give talks in schools, for example. I blocked him on FB for the sake of my blood pressure
Eric Worrall says:
July 11, 2013 at 8:02 pm
The thing people forget when considering IQ scores is that IQ 100 is the population average – there are many, many people below IQ 100… 🙂
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And that is enough to really frighten you when you consider they all vote as adults when organized, shepherded and paid by Community Organizers that is.
What? You didn’t realize the whole goal for Community Organizers is to use those people as political weapons?
Just look at what is happening in Florida RIGHT NOW. The Organizer and Chief has sent the US Justice Department off to ORGANIZE PROTESTS concerning the ongoing Zimmerman trial. I kid you not.
Chad Wozniak says:
July 11, 2013 at 10:27 pm
@Bill_W -\
As the holder of an MBA along with a PhD in another field, I must differ with the thought that business is a worthless subject. Because business fails quickly if it falls for the sort of irrationality that is killing science and the humanities, theories analogous to CAGW….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
My husband and I use ‘Harvard Business School’ as a swear word. Living in Boston we have just seen too many HBS grads alight for a couple of years really mess up a business and flit on to the next. They usually show a great short term ROI by cutting things like maintenance that comes back to bite the company HARD. In one company the back-up extruder screws were not replaced as used. The lead time for getting a new one was between one and two years. After the first extruder failed and had to be shut down the company lost 6 months production and paid a heavy premium to have the new extruder screw expedited. The second company was not so lucky. Because of deferred maintenance the extruder exploded killing and injuring people. (I and the maintenance guy had quit over the issue just a week before.)
Engineers and others that have had to argue with the business and accounting types often hold them in contempt for reasons like the above although much of it is a lack of a common language and understanding. I ran labs for years and took business and accounting courses so I could more easily defend my budgets. I always got what I wanted because I could ‘speak the language’
This may be rather childish, but I can never read HadCrut without thinking it would be better named HatCrud, thus indicating in one fell swoop the place from which they are speaking and the quality of the data.
As a product of Connecticut College, Emily is also an advertisement for this institution of lowest learning. How many parents will NOT to send their children to Connecticut College?
Go Camels!
I blame Mountaineer Montessori, screw ’em up early and get their cash.
,
tgorn says:
July 11, 2013 at 9:17 pm
> Sorry. First thing that comes to mind to me is: Computer Science
> Definitely a science.
There are days I could argue it’s a Black Art. And that my computer is out to get me.
TerryS says:
July 12, 2013 at 12:08 am
> As somebody who has a Computer Science degree I would have to disagree [that it is a science]. There was a maths requirement but not a statistics one. Laboratory and experimental work didn’t exist – it was writing code. There is no form of observational measurement, analysis and conclusions to be drawn.
One reason I’m a software engineer instead of a computer scientist is that I preferred creating systems to the heavy theoretical slant of the computer science dept. (This was back when CMU had only a graduate CS degree.) Perhaps undergraduate programs spend more time writing code, but a lot of the graduate programs dealt with recursive function theory, optimizing compilers, and in general inventing the tools that engineers used to build things like the ARPAnet.
John Blake says:
July 11, 2013 at 8:56 pm
“Against stupidity, the gods themselves are helpless.”
But Darwin isn’t (helpless). It’s just evolution in action (Larry Niven in Oath of Fealty). And perhaps that is exactly what the gods had in mind.
On another note, how about MoveOver.org?
Besides demonstrating her complete incompetence, she does raise an interesting dilemma. hadCrut is SUPPOSED to be raw data. Since when does RAW data need peer review? And who is the peer that reviews it? God? Gaia? Mother Nature?
The more people I meet with a BA, the more I’m sure that a BA these days equals a 12th Grade diploma from 1945…
@CaligulaJones
I think you are over estimating it. I am not sure they are up to 12th grade 1945.
Even more stunning is Emily’s Connecticut College environmental science degree contrasted with Kernen’s University of Colorado molecular biology degree + masters from MIT + cancer research papers published in Cell, Developmental Biology and the renowned Cold Spring Harbor Symposia.
Just who is the informed person here?
Again, I am reminded of a broken clock being right twice a day…
Awww Janice, you made me backtrack to check her out; her beauty is completely un-redeeming for her words. Now if she was Helen of Troy or a young Elizabeth Taylor…
Gail:
I do agree with Chad and I mostly agree with you about the Harvard Business grads. Frankly, anyone who brings in an inexperienced business grad and lets them make unchecked un-validated decisions that damage the business deserves their end. Just the back slope of the business paradigm in action and everyone involved should make sure the blame follows the decision makers.
On the other hand, I have worked with a couple of Harvard Business degreed graduates who were worth every penny we paid them. The savings we achieved were from improved processes and technology, not stupid budget cuts or misused employees (“let’s double, triple the marketing budget and use advertising to get us out of this mess…” Oh yeah, those following years were banner years, for the competition.)
I will confess, for several years I was pursuing a business finance degree at Wharton. That is before my company’s finance department brought me in to work on their spanking new PCs; like the original IBM with attached 10mb hard drive cabinet. Back in those days, computers were under the finance department in many businesses. A ‘computer science’ degree didn’t exist then in my local colleges; one majored in an accepted degree and built up a portfolio of additional ‘computer’ credits, usually in languages and ‘system’ or ‘program’ development. My first run in with a ‘computer science’ degreed employee was a lark and I had great fun.
{ Gail Combs says:
July 12, 2013 at 3:56 am
Chad Wozniak says:
July 11, 2013 at 10:27
My husband and I use ‘Harvard Business School’ }
First off, when it’s spelled as pronounced: Hauwvud.
Second, please don’t swear on WUWT.
>TerryS says:
>July 12, 2013 at 12:08 am
> As somebody who has a Computer Science degree I would have to disagree [that it is a science]. There was a maths requirement but not a statistics one. Laboratory and experimental work didn’t exist – it was writing code. There is no form of observational measurement, analysis and conclusions to be drawn.
Hmm. I think it depends on the university. There are university that offer Computer Science, and Computer Engineering and Software Engineering as separate degree tracks. The first is heavy heavy theoretical work. The second is practical application of theory (what goes into building efficient systems) and the third is coding. I’ve known CS grads who have only taken a few programming courses, because they are not studying to be coders.
Reasonable definitions –
Computer Science – ” systematic study of algorithmic methods for representing and transforming information, including their theory, design, implementation, application, and efficiency.”
Computer Engineering – “the design and prototyping of computing devices and systems. ”
Software Engineering – “the application of a systematic, disciplined, quantifiable approach to the design, development, operation, and maintenance of software, and the study of these approaches; that is, the application of engineering to software.”
Who cares? Miss Emily is a low drone, a square. “Temperature” is old hat, the corporatists are moving their pliant minions into “climate change” irrespective of temperature. And her comments specifying HadCrut are a huge faux pas, which undermine the idea of “consensus.”
Sad to think how many students hitched their “major” unto a business bubble using government and science to create and increase profits.
I don’t get it – usually Montessori schools are pretty good.
To summarise & encapsulate what the UnfrozenCavemanMD said…
Non-Science Nonsense.
All non-sciences have the word ‘science’ in their title.
No true sciences have the word ‘science’ in their title.
Some non-sciences do not have ‘science’ in their title
========================================================================
😎
Great line but I’m afraid the crackedpots came after The Fall.
(Jeremiah 2:13)
(now where’d I put my glue …. )
“Forecast the Facts”
Shouldn’t that be “Forget the Facts”?
No, “Fake the Facts”. Or “Forecasts instead of Facts”. Or “Forecasts Fudging Facts”. Phantasy-land.
One can forecast with a negative skill value. We’ve seen it in climate science.
Smirk! LOL…
Good one Tim, well both of them; though the first one had me flashing back to Cliff Robertson in PT 109 not President Kennedy in one of his speeches.
HadCRUt is bunk science. But not the way she means . . .
Ken says:
July 11, 2013 at 6:47 pm
“And earlier today, David Suzuki declared himself to be anti-immigration. Did something cosmic happen today that I missed?”
I’m ROFL.
His grandparents were immigrants from Japan as many were in SW BC going on a century ago. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Suzuki)
http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/07/11/jason-kenney-slams-xenophobic-david-suzuki-after-environmentalist-claims-canada-is-full/ REF
http://o.canada.com/2013/07/11/david-suzuki-immigration-french-newspaper-interview/ (journalist says translation is correct)
Suzuki’s anti-immigration rant is consistent with his underlying ideology, which preaches fixed-pie economis and drive-to-the-bottom ethics, but is another example of his increasing desperation as people are not responding enough to suit him. Suzuki and spouse sit on their large Gulf Islands property despairing that, with forays to their expensive real estate in the Kitsilano area of Vancouver BC.
The reason people from poor countries emigrate is lack of freedom. Fix the political systems and those areas would not be poor anymore. But Suzuki does not actually want freedom, as he is effectively a Marxist (read his articles and speeches, including to the one-percent mob in Vancouver BC). His rants remind me of what civil rights activist Bob Friedland said about leftist political activists (see http://www.keithsketchley.com/newleft.htm, top of page).