CBS evening news finally, after over two weeks, gets around to covering Climategate. Most interestingly, they have a short clip of an interview with Kevin Trenberth. Dr. Trenberth, as many recall said this in one of the CRU emails:
The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.
Look at what Dr. Trenberth adds now:
h/t to WUWT reader LiamIam
photon without a Higgs (14:26:24) :
Icarus (13:45:31) :
Still amused today Icarus? Here is your first comment the day ClimateGate broke :
————————————————
Icarus (16:46:28) :
I think it’s pretty amusing that anyone here would be taken in by this stuff. In fact it’s comical. Like breathing on an ant nest – someone has you all running around and falling over each other in your eagerness to trumpet evidence of ‘the Great Global Warming Fraud’.
Wise up folks. You’re doing yourselves a disservice. You can do better than this.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/19/breaking-news-story-hadley-cru-has-apparently-been-hacked-hundreds-of-files-released/
————————————————–
Now that you fully know it is real why are you still a manmade global warming clone? ‘You’re doing yourselves a disservice. You can do better than this.’
Yes I was completely wrong about that – I thought the emails were faked when they talked about using a ‘trick’ and ‘hiding the decline’. However, that’s no comfort to anyone who seized on these emails as evidence of a massive hoax or conspiracy amongst climate scientists, since it is clear that they reveal no such thing.
Icarus (13:45:31) :
Given that global warming is unequivocally happening
This is just a quote from some book. It is not reality.
The earth is cooling now. What you claim is happening isn’t happening. The earth is not arrayed in the things you imagine. The global warming emperor has no clothes.
I’d agree. He vacillates between scepticism and belief – erring on the latter for some reason – to keep in the peer review process i’d imagine.
He says:
It is not a sufficient explanation to say that a cool year is due to natural variability. Similarly, common arguments of skeptics that the late 20th century warming is a recovery from the Little Ice Age or has other natural origins are inadequate, as they do not provide the physical mechanisms involved. There must be a physical explanation, whether natural or anthropogenic.
Emphasis on the last sentence, although he admits that its a travesty that the lack of warming cannot be accounted for. Jones et al are more concerned to prove that the decline can be erased than accounted for
photon without a Higgs (15:08:11) :
Icarus (13:45:31) :
Icarus
You make no mention of UHI. Do you think there is no such thing as UHI?
My understanding is that it is taken into account when using the raw temperature data. Is it not the case that using only the data from the best-sited monitoring stations makes virtually no difference at all to the temperature series?
Addendum:
abover addressed to: Paul Vaughan (13:50:05) :
Icarus (13:45:31) :
Mike Dubrasich (10:44:56):
[Trenberth] is distraught that Thermageddon hasn’t happened, and in fact temps are going the other way.
Actually, no. If he’s ‘distraught’ about anything it is about the fact that climate monitoring systems are not yet capable of tracking all the energy in the climate system as it flows between reservoirs such as oceans and atmosphere.
sounds like you just said we don’t really understand all the complexities of climate.
i think we all need to take a deep breath, realise that most of the forcing has been from outside forces, and get back to science.
John M (09:41:40) :
“China and India’s emissions will continue to go up at an aggressive rate.”
sure, If india and China agree to the summit and sign the protocols then continue unexpurgated increasing emissions, they can say, when presented with the *divergence* from their intentions and their actions, then can just say “We were taken out of context”.
In fact if you steal $300 worth of goodies from your local department store, you can say it was taken out of context in court.
“Actually, no. If he’s ‘distraught’ about anything it is about the fact that climate monitoring systems are not yet capable of tracking all the energy in the climate system as it flows between reservoirs such as oceans and atmosphere. ”
Thats just scientifically ridiculous. Its saying that model predictions are better than the climate, so when the thermometers show cooling then, well, there’s something wrong with the climate, since the models are wonderful. Trouble is, cooling wasn’t predicted, so it can’t be accounted for, so it must be hiding in the broom cupboard. Actually, if you turn your heating down this winter, and it goes cooler in your home, that heat isn’t migrating.. It is thermalising at the new temperature. Heat, like force, is a form of energy. It isn’t a solid. If you pull a lever then force and resistance are inferred. Let it go and it returns to equilibrium. The energy simply disippates.
Icarus (15:28:50) :
Hey man, what’s your gig? If your gig was real there’s no need to make stuff up, or exaggerate.
So your gig isn’t real.
Take a lesson from your first reaction after ClimateGate broke. Get out of the made up science. Your reliance on fabrication has become a bad habit.
Icarus (15:28:50) :
watch the good point made in this video from 0:45 to 1:03
Icarus (15:28:50) :
Please provide the link to where UHI has been taken in to account by the man that wrote the book you quote.
Icarus (15:28:50) :
La Nina is not happening now. El Nino is. Yet the earth continues too cool.
You have not addressed the things I pointed out to you except for UHI.
You’re no fun.
You must have some environmentalist agenda. Are you a member of, or do you head up, an environmentalist organization?
Mark (09:44:45) :Prepare for mass civil unrest when temp`s drop and food production is hit, why can`t these idiots admit they have gotten it wrong?
Accuweather.com is predicting snow in California potentially down to the valley floor and possibly even in the S.F. Bay Area. Verrry Unusual.
The nations ‘vegetable and fruit basket’ is about to become a snow bowl.
Hope you like sorbet…
photon without a Higgs (15:58:13)
They twist things so much, using false analogies, for one. Since there is no danger to begin with, even if the CO2 effect were 3 times as great, then 1/3 of no danger is no danger.
I would have liked to see Lindzen’s answer to that bit of propaganda.
P Wilson (15:28:17) “Jones et al are more concerned to prove that the decline can be erased than accounted for”
My concern about Jones: He has mucked around with 1940s temperatures without addressing confounding (i.e. shared variance) involving EOP (Earth orientation parameters), clouds, etc. In fixating on British vs. American ships (taking the measurements), he has made a mistake we teach Stat 101 students to avoid.
photon without a Higgs (15:58:13)
Oh my word.
Lindzen calmly states in reply to Epstein:
“you’re compromising the most fundamental belief in democracy. You’re saying: If we can fool people, thats a good way to get people to do what you think is right because you couldn’t convince them for the right reasons”
Epstein in reply says we all have to be smacked over the head with something or another to goad us,
What is the difference? Lindzen is clear, calm and scientific, Epstein is quite aggressive, persuasive, even insecure? This begets the galling overwhelm in the face of cold rationality. As a medic, you’d think that Epstein is talking in more unusually alarmist terms because he’s not a climatologist – yet climatologists who set the consensus are even more galling, as surprising as it seems
Reporters used to go into ecstatic fits over FOI requests which were delayed and denied. She must have skipped that day in journalism class at the University.
photon without a Higgs (13:14:20) asks
“Is this story about Revkin really real?”
Hmm, yes we have to be careful, its almost too good to be true.
As others have since commented, one would expect more caution, especially since Revkin has already been burned by his appearance in the emails as an apparent Hockey Team cheerleader. The threat to give him the ‘Big Cutoff’ serves only to confirm that is/was in league with the Team.
I posted because the site looks pretty respectable:
http://nlt.ashbrook.org/
and the author real
“Steven Hayward is the F.K. Weyerhaeuser Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and an Adjunct Fellow of the Ashbrook Center.”
http://nlt.ashbrook.org/author/authorf641b/
…but perhaps someone needs to contact the author and confirm.
oops: Nick d’arbeloff, in the above, and not Epstein
Richard (11:02:49) :
What can one say to that? I now live in a country where people are afraid to state their opinions on a scientific question. They will have their livelihoods taken away from them if they do.
I sometimes have to pinch myself to ensure that this really is happening and I’m not just living in a bad dream.
It is happening and it is real. I’m in private contact with no less than 4 different folks who want to contribute to work showing AGW is a hoax and the data are shoddy, all of whom have shared their names with me, and all of whom begged anonymity as they would be vilified at work if they were “outed”. They use pseudonyms on the public boards for fear of retribution from the warmistas.
At least 2 have Ph.Ds in technical fields. The other two have degrees, but I’m not sure the exact level.
The only folks who can openly speak are the ones who are retired or have no avenue for being attacked (like me. I’m a “nobody”, so I have liberty…)
At a recent gathering of alumni from a prior employer, one of the managers began to effuse over “Al Gore’s New Book!”. When I said “WHY would anyone ever want to read his stuff, it’s broken science without foundation” … well, lets just say I was not the most popular guy at the punch bowl… (but in the parking lot, a couple of folks agreed).
I suspect that whoever “leaked” the UEA stuff was such a “mole”. Had to say the right things to keep the job, but could not stomach the fraud and sleep at night. Speculation, but it fits the date stamping and surrounding events.
Basically, the AGW “Attack The Messenger” meme has simply resulted in a very large Underground Resistance movement… Vive La Resistance!
The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.
~Dr. Kevin Trenberth
After Dr. Trenberth and his Climate Crisis Crew have rejected the obvious conclusion that the continuing increase in CO2 concentrations does not force a continuing increase in global mean temperature, then it isn’t surprising that they are stymied for an explanation for a lack of continued warming.
Honest people and good scientists would conclude that the hypothesis linking CO2 to a continuing or runaway rise in temperature has been falsified.
photon without a Higgs (15:13:32) :
The earth is in a cooling trend. And in 2008 Arctic ice was in a rapid growing trend. Global warming is not happening Icarus.
The data says you’re wrong. Just as a matter of interest, what magnitude of change in global temperature do you think constitutes ‘trend’ rather than just natural variability, and over what length of time? Can you justify your answers rather than just give unsupported figures?
Climate models showed that the temperature would increase in line with global warming through the last 10 years. Such modelling even led organisations like the Met Office to say that 2007 would likely be the hottest year on record.
these models have failed for the moment. (The trend of cooling is expected to last for sever decades, according to even the proponents of AGW) which is why Phil Jones said it would be nice if it were to warm to prove the sceptics wrong. Other forecasters using historical data reconstructions, or solar techniques say the whole century ahead will be a cool one.
There are several issues related to this however: What causes warming, and what causes cooling?
Incidentally, the Met office say that in the UK there is a 1 in 7 chance of a colder than average winter, yet a 50% chance of a milder than average winter.
That must mean a 35% chance of an exactly average winter.
Thats hedging bets for every conceivable scenario!
I don’t have time to read all the comments but I wish to register my disgust with this CBS segment as it frames the issue of replacing recent proxy data with measured data as if it were merely using the most accurate data when the issue is that the proxy used is not correlated with those modern measurements so that past measurements would be relevant to reality. It makes it seem that they did nothing unusual – at least to many viewers. As an aside, they also use a slightly less common spelling of climategate (i.e. climate-gate) though putting that down to intent might be a bit too cynical on my part. Then again, I didn’t become cynical by living in a world of ethical behavior and professional journalism. I suppose I should consider CBS to be noble for having breathed the word “climategate” in any form. Let me go work on my gratitude skills.
My fear of global warming is not very high right now. Our 3-day forecast here in Montana is for lows of -13, -17, and -10 degrees F. Highs will be in single digits.