Vote for the Blog that Changed US Climate History

You may remember reading about my surfacestaions.org project and the climate monitoring station at Detroit Lakes, MN surveyed by Don Kostuch. There were two air conditioners within feet of the station, and a big jump in temperature the same year they were placed next to it. I surmised the A/C units had something to do with that, and the “usual warming suspects” went nutty with criticisms. The resulting hullabaloo they created attracted a lot of attention, and statistics expert Steve McIntyre of Climate Audit noticed that there was another reason for the jump.

 It was bad data handling by NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) .  They fouled up at the year 2000 in joining data sets. As a result of McIntyre’s work, NASA was forced to revise the data, and the result was that the much touted year 1998 formerly known as “the hottest year on record in the USA” fell to a close second behind 1934 during the peak of the dust bowl years.

The Weblog Awards are the world’s largest blog competition, and Climate Audit has been nominated as a finalist for “Best Science Blog. Note that Climate Audit and Mr. McIntyre are also responsible for proving the “Hockey Stick” was based on faulty analysis of tree ring data, and thus was minimized in the latest IPCC report.

A blog with this magnitude of contribution deserves to win over blogs that just report things and accept commentary. I provide the hosting server for Climate Audit, (after the traffic from the latest discover took it down) so voting for it is also indirectly a vote for me too.

Vote for best science weblog here; and if so inclined, click on Climate Audit. Voting is permitted once every 24 hours. Vote early, vote often.

click to vote

Interested in helping? You can copy the badge above to place on websites,  or paste this HTML code:

<a target=”_blank” href=”http://2007.weblogawards.org/polls/best-science-blog-1.php” mce_href=”http://2007.weblogawards.org/polls/best-science-blog-1.php”>
<img src=https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/webawards1.gif alt=”click to vote” width=”120″ height=”90″ /></a>

Voting closes November 8th

Advertisements

29 thoughts on “Vote for the Blog that Changed US Climate History

  1. “… so voting for it is also indirectly a vote for me too.”

    Great! Now I know that by voting for climateaudit.org I am also giving credit to another person who has “… Changed US Climate History.”

  2. If you think the GISS Y2K is bad, you should check out their temp. anomily chart GISS Surface Temperature Analysis : http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/maps/ Notice the base years being used? 1951 to 1980. Wasn’t everyone afraid of the coming ice age during this period? You think using such a data set for comparison purposes against today’s temps might lead people astray?????

  3. It’s not that That I am surprised at what I present below. It’s stuff like this that lands a bad liberal as a refugee under the Big Tent: I cannot abide cheating. I especially cannot abide PRIDE in cheating.

    So like poor Lear, “I shall go to Re[a]gan. I and my hundred knights.”

    Note well that at this point CA trails by around 80 votes. If CA loses by a hair, I want all of you here to drink this one in and feel the outrage.

    He says he doesn’t come from Chicago.

    Florida, maybe?

    ———————————————-

    PRESENTING:

    “# The DoLittleon 02 Nov 2007 at 4:50 pm
    “Well, I just cheated for ya… [i.e., for Bad Astronomy]

    “I have 20 computers here in the lab, so you got at least 20 more votes from me.

    “I’m not going to be in lab tomorrow, but I’ll be cheating again on Sunday.

    “…and no I don’t live in Chicago!”

    —————————————–

    I like to think that no one around here would do any such thing, even in retliation.

  4. We dropped back to third place behind Pharyngula and BadAstronomy (please forgive my apropriation of Climate Audit as “we”. It’s just that I am invested in the belief that AGW is the latest in a long series of media driven hoaxes, foisted on the population to everybodies detrement.)
    I am convinced that a victory for Climate Audit would be a boost for all of us.

  5. But is it genuine worship? Or is it doLittleton’s ilk stuffing counterfeit coin in Yama’s pray-o-mat?

    I can’t say if GW is bad science or not–but I damnwell know bad scientists when I smell them.

  6. Actually, the worst of it is when they refuse to release data, methods, source code, operating manuals.

    Would you sit down at a poker game with someone who refused to cut cards (and then it turns out, no shuffle, either)? No matter HOW many of his friends swore up and down as to his trustworthiness?

    These guys aren’t scientists; they’re alchemists. They just play scientists on TV. I am just not interested in the concensus of alchemists and witches, however unanimous it may be. I’ll stick with those petty, picayune card-cutters, thanks all the same.

    As for the cheating on the online vote, WHERE’S THE OUTRAGE? You-all got broken fingers or something?

  7. “… so voting for it is also indirectly a vote for me too.”

    Voting for CA (and indirectly SS), is a step in the right direction for science. CA and SS are debating real science in live time. These sites provide countering science arguments that will eventually lead to a truth – but in a much shorter time span than ever previously seen. This is a great use for the internet and a boon to mankind.
    I like the other sites, but CA/SS deserve the award if for nothing else but being a truly innovative way to bring science, without interpretation/spin, to folks.

  8. WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE?

    Anyone who would cheat on an online vote would suck eggs. (And anyone who would suck eggs would deliberately increase the recorded temperature records of a surface station!)

  9. Pingback: Junkscience.com endorses Climate Audit to win « Watts Up With That?

  10. Speaking of cheating . . .

    Maybe that jocular correlation St. Mac made between red states and recorded temperature decreases Vs blue states and temperature increases (just 3 exceptions, overall) is more than just an amazing coincidence.

    Just what are the odds of tossing 47 heads out of 50?

    As compared with the odds that temps are being recorded honestly?

  11. “and less than 400 below Bad Asteroids.”

    And how do we know THAT, pray tell? Because the counter SAYS so? Is THAT it?

    Isn’t that pretty much the same reason we KNOW that the temperatures in Marysville, CA, has risen 4 degrees C since 1920?

    But the noble NOAA hath said that Marysville is 4C warmer. And surely the NOAA are honorable men!

  12. But don’t worry.

    All we have to do to achieve that good old “100% confidence level” is to adjust 20 votes off of the BA total. I’m so sure THAT will guarantee us an honest count!

  13. Just what are the odds of tossing 47 heads out of 50?

    Obviously you’ve never seen Rosencranz and Guildenstern are Dead ;)

  14. Wow, it’s neck and neck between Bad Astronomy and CA. 347 vote difference as of right now. Pharyngula has dropped back by almost 2000 votes.

  15. “Obviously you’ve never seen Rosencranz and Guildenstern are Dead”

    Oooooh, yes I have. And I had it very much in mind, too! Good call. I couldn’t recall any quotes, so I didn’t indulge.

    I’m moving this one on up to the more recect St. Mac thread.

    Meanwhile, we are left to wonder how many others are indulging in disgusting, foul, revolting cheating . . . and I don’t just mean in this little contest, either!

    I think I’m gonna spill a little blood on that nice white statistical snow–and then roll in it!

  16. Oooooh, yes I have. And I had it very much in mind, too! Good call. I couldn’t recall any quotes, so I didn’t indulge.

    Hehe, fond some at wikiquotes, here http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Rosencrantz_%26_Guildenstern_Are_Dead

    Here are some of my favs.

    Rosencrantz: Half of what he said meant something else and the other half didn’t mean anything at all.

    Guildenstern: The colours red, blue and green are real. The colour yellow is a mystical experience shared by everybody. Demolish.

  17. Here’s an eerily relevant quote from The Player: Audiences know what they expect and that is all they are prepared to believe in.

  18. All this lack of outrage won’t do you any good, you know. All it’s gonna do is make me all the more outraged–at the lack of outrage!

    “IT IS AN OUTRAGE! I SHALL TELL EVERYBODY.”

  19. My comments “await moderation”, do they?

    Well, they won’t be getting any “moderation” off of me!

  20. I notice that doLittleton (or someone else) has pulled his post. Gosh, I hope it wasn’t on account of little old me!

    So, now that the voting is literally neack-and-neck, is anyone gonna pull (at least) 40 votes off of BA? I won’t be holding breath!

  21. Well, gosharootie. Climate Audit loses by less than 40 votes.

    Didja hear that? LESS THAN 40 VOTES.

    Fancy that.

    Guess I’ll post my little clip again, just for good measure. I clipped it off Bad Astronomy.

    —————————————————-

    PRESENTING:

    “# The DoLittleon 02 Nov 2007 at 4:50 pm
    “Well, I just cheated for ya… [i.e., for Bad Astronomy]

    “I have 20 computers here in the lab, so you got at least 20 more votes from me.

    “I’m not going to be in lab tomorrow, but I’ll be cheating again on Sunday.

    “…and no I don’t live in Chicago!”

    —————————————–——————————

    And no response whatever to this, O, my apparently broken-fingered brethren.

    Yup, as of this entry, Climate Audit loses by less than 40 votes.

    Outrage, anybody? Mere contempt won’t do.

    Now, I want to to picture DoLittleton right now.

    As he breaks out the champagne.
    As he high-fives his buddies.
    As he pats himself on the back for a job well done.

    Imagine the grin on his face, the warm feelings of triumph and superiority he is feeling RIGHT NOW.

    Hear that? He’s laughing at you, RIGHT NOW.

    Bask in the contempt he feels for you, RIGHT NOW.

    Swallow THAT.

    I SAID, OUTRAGE ANYBODY?

  22. I say “let’s get back to the science”. This whole thing is not even wrong.

    It would take some cleaning up to be a popularity contest.

    I mean, am I the only one who noticed that they “made adjustments” until they got the answers they wanted?

    Where have we seen that before?

  23. \Where have we seen that before?\

    ” They are night zombies. They are my neighbors. The have returned from the dead. Aaaaah.”

    “I-L-L-I-N-O-I-S”

Comments are closed.