Alternate title: Something wonky this way comes
I try to get away to work on my paper and the climate world explodes, pulling me back in. Strange things are happening related to the BEST data and co-authors Richard Muller and Judith Curry. Implosion might be a good word.
Popcorn futures are soaring. BEST Co-author Judith Curry drops a bombshell:
Her comments, in an exclusive interview with The Mail on Sunday, seem certain to ignite a furious academic row. She said this affair had to be compared to the notorious ‘Climategate’ scandal two years ago.
Here’s the short timeline.
1. The GWPF plots a flat 10 year graph using BEST data:
2. The Mail on Sunday runs a scathing article comparing BEST’s data plotted by GWPF and the data presented in papers. They print this comparison graph:
Note: timescales don’t match on graphs above, 200 years/10 years. A bit naughty on the part of the Sunday Mail to put them together as many readers won’t notice.
3. Dr. Judith Curry, BEST co-author, turns on Muller, in the Mail on Sunday article citing “hide the decline”:
In Prof Curry’s view, two of the papers were not ready to be published, in part because they did not properly address the arguments of climate sceptics.
As for the graph disseminated to the media, she said: ‘This is “hide the decline” stuff. Our data show the pause, just as the other sets of data do. Muller is hiding the decline.
‘To say this is the end of scepticism is misleading, as is the statement that warming hasn’t paused. It is also misleading to say, as he has, that the issue of heat islands has been settled.’
Prof Muller said she was ‘out of the loop’. He added: ‘I wasn’t even sent the press release before it was issued.’
…
But although Prof Curry is the second named author of all four papers, Prof Muller failed to consult her before deciding to put them on the internet earlier this month, when the peer review process had barely started, and to issue a detailed press release at the same time.
He also briefed selected journalists individually. ‘It is not how I would have played it,’ Prof Curry said. ‘I was informed only when I got a group email. I think they have made errors and I distance myself from what they did.
‘It would have been smart to consult me.’ She said it was unfortunate that although the Journal of Geophysical Research had allowed Prof Muller to issue the papers, the reviewers were, under the journal’s policy, forbidden from public comment.
4. Ross McKittrick unloads:
Prof McKittrick added: ‘The fact is that many of the people who are in a position to provide informed criticism of this work are currently bound by confidentiality agreements.
‘For the Berkeley team to have chosen this particular moment to launch a major international publicity blitz is a highly unethical sabotage of the peer review process.’
5. According to BEST’s own data, Los Angeles is cooling, fast:
suyts says:
October 31, 2011 at 12:27 pm
“there are two reasons why they look different.”
Thanks for the answers.
Thanks orkneygal, very much interesting this Greenhouse gases Observing SATellite – GOSAT – breath (ibuki).
English home page at http://www.gosat.nies.go.jp/index_e.html (good information).
10 years of flatlined temperature trend does not provide any predictive skill, but it does say something which clearly contradicts the AGW theory and states unequivocally, something that all warmists have trouble repeating:
We are NOT warming NOW and we haven’t been for some time!
Meanwhile the increase in atmospheric CO2 has not paused. No correlation – No linkage. GK
“As pointed out by others on this blog, ice cores show that CO2 lags temperature by about 800 years. Eight hundred years ago was the Medieval Warm Period. That would make the current rise in CO2 right on schedule.”
Must be the cooling effect of CO2 that causes the ice age. As the CO2 decreases, the earth warms, AFTER the earth warms, the CO2 is released, cooling the climate, next ice age follows.
The pdf made public 9/24/11 at http://climaterealists.com/index.php?tid=145&linkbox=true shows the temperature measurements for the last decade and they are flat. It also shows an equation based on the physical phenomena involved, with inputs of only sunspot numbers and ppmv CO2, that calculates the average global temperatures (agt) since 1895 with 88.4% accuracy (87.9% if CO2 is assumed to have no influence). When fitted to the climate prior to 1990 it accurately predicted the average global temperatures since then.
Looking at the COOP data stations for the lower 48, Alaska and the environment Canada data this is the distribution of the space and temperature change between 11,267 stations listed. The ones with the most distance between them and the biggest temperature difference (Delta Z) are located along the northern edge of Canada and Alaska, so much for 1200 Km smoothing.
Nearest Neighbor Statistics
—————————————————————————————————
Separation in degrees |Delta Z|
—————————————————————————————————
1%%-tile: 0.00833350000001 0
5%%-tile: 0.016667 0
10%%-tile: 0.0235706974441 0.25
25%%-tile: 0.060667834239 1.5
50%%-tile: 0.141639439649 4.3
75%%-tile: 0.245090878837 9.3334
90%%-tile: 0.333796432014 16.3
95%%-tile: 0.401386707414 21
99%%-tile: 1.18045565779 31.5
Minimum: 0.000334000000009 0
Maximum: 13.0147777119 58