All Scientists are Sceptics ~Professor Bob Carter

Whenever someone asserts that a scientific question is “settled,” they tell me immediately that they don’t understand the first thing about science. Science is never settled. Dr David Deming

Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of the science of climate change is the lack of any real substance in attempts to justify the hypothesis ~Professor Stewart Franks

A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf

Monday, 31 October 2011

B.E.S.T has 'No Scientific Basis for Claim' at Best - Global warming has stopped!

Prof Judith Curry - Image WUWT
A leading member of Professor Muller's Berkeley Earth Surface temperature (BEST) accused him "of  trying to mislead the public by hiding the fact that BEST’s research shows global warming has stopped."

The Mail Online reports
Prof Judith Curry, who chairs the Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at America’s prestigious Georgia Institute of Technology, said that Prof Muller’s claim that he has proven global warming sceptics wrong was also a ‘huge mistake’, with no  scientific basis.
Prof Curry is a distinguished climate researcher with more than 30 years experience and the second named co-author of the BEST project’s four research papers.
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.
Professor Curry accuses her team leader of trying to "Hide the Decline."
In fact, Prof Curry said, the project’s research data show there has been no increase in world temperatures since the end of the Nineties – a fact confirmed by a new analysis that The Mail on Sunday has obtained.
There is no scientific basis for saying that warming hasn’t stopped,’ she said. ‘To say that there is detracts from the credibility of the data, which is very unfortunate.’
Graph by GWPF

But a report to be published today by the Global Warming Policy Foundation  (HERE) includes a graph of world average temperatures over the past ten years, drawn from the BEST project’s data and revealed on its website.
This graph shows that the trend of the last decade is absolutely flat, with no increase at all – though the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have carried on rising relentlessly.

Professor Muller made the false claim in the Wall Street Journal that his study showed that the end of global warming scepticism. This was picked up by the Alarmist press: 

  • The Guardian - "The World is warming and sceptics are wrong."
  • BBC News - "Global Warming 'confirmed' by independent study."
  • The Independent - "Ex-climate sceptic now backs global warming."
  • ABC News - "Sceptic finds he now agrees global warming is real"
  • Sydney Morning Herald - "Sceptic now agrees global warming is real"
(Many more here)

Although he wrote the article for the Wall Street Journal, Prof Muller when questioned seemed to be straddling the fence:

Yesterday Prof Muller insisted that neither his claims that there has not been a standstill, nor the graph, were misleading because the project had made its raw data available on its  website, enabling others to draw their own graphs.
However, he admitted it was true that the BEST data suggested that world temperatures have not risen for about 13 years. But in his view, this might not be ‘statistically significant’,  although, he added, it was equally  possible that it was – a statement which left other scientists mystified.
Continuing Prof Curry's interview with the UK Mail:
Of course this isn’t the end of scepticism,’ she said. ‘To say that is the biggest mistake he [Prof Muller] has made. When I saw he was saying that I just thought, “Oh my God”.’
In fact, she added, in the wake of the unexpected global warming standstill, many climate scientists who had previously rejected sceptics’ arguments were now taking them much more seriously.


9 comments:

  1. curryja | October 30, 2011 at 1:27 pm | Reply


    I just read Tamino’s post. Apart from the usual climate dittohead bash curry meme, his analysis is useful. However, please understand that my statement to Rose was about the plot with the 10 year running mean ending in 2006 being misleading. It is misleading. There has been a lag/slowdown/whatever you want to call it in the rate of temperature increase since 1998. This is being widely discussed, see the greenwire article for various opinions on this http://www.eenews.net/public/Greenwire/2011/10/25/1

    So, actually this is a “hide the slowdown” issue.

    As far as I can tell, there is nothing in the BEST data that says there is no lag/slow down in the warming during the past decade or so.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This should explain it

    Re the last two plots on the Mail 10 year graph

    at Tamino

    Nick Stokes | October 31, 2011 at 2:18 am | Reply
    I did a count of the data that BEST has for 2010. In March they have 14488 stations reporting. In April and May there are 47. And in June, none.
    And April and May are all Antarctic.

    Rattus Norvegicus | October 31, 2011 at 2:39 am | Reply
    Well, that pretty much settles it then. Those months clearly should not have been analyzed because of inadequate coverage of the data. Good catch.”

    This then explains the deep drop in the last two plot points (apr. may) on the Mail
    graph, removing them as Tamino has correctly done and there is an upward trend

    ReplyDelete
  3. Obviously, John, you know more than one of the teams' authors, Prof Curry.

    When did you get your PhD?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Geoff, you can download the BEST data and count the APR/MAY reporting stations.
    Curry is only referring to the 10yr period to 2006.

    This is not her specialty, she only appears as second author due to the alphabetical listing used, she confirms the quality of the research but is rightly angry with Muller for the Media circus, google Muller ,he has always been a sceptic. The study was in part funded by sceptics

    The only thing this study does is confirm temperature records it makes no other claims except in paper four because they have not yet done the ocean warming study,without which they cannot declare that AGW is the cause. I doubt that Muller will even accept AGW after that study.
    your side is attacking him for no reason,

    he now accepts that the land temperature record is correct,

    see you lot later

    JB

    ReplyDelete
  5. Of course he's a skeptic, John. Hence his GreenGov arm of his company Muller and Associates

    http://www.mullerandassociates.com/projects.php

    ReplyDelete
  6. For Mr Byatt -

    You need not wonder about Muller anymore. Here is what he said in 2003:

    “Let me be clear. My own reading of the literature and study of paleoclimate suggests strongly that carbon dioxide from burning of fossil fuels will prove to be the greatest pollutant of human history. It is likely to have severe and detrimental effects on global climate.”

    Those words hardly sound like they came from a man with an open mind! Do Alarmists really think that they get anywhere with their thinly veiled deceptions? Most people are very unhappy when they realize someone has been playing them for a fool.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The quote in context Geoff

    http://muller.lbl.gov/TRessays/23-Medievalglobalwarming.html

    ReplyDelete
  8. As an innocent 'by-stander' in all this High-brow debate,I get the distinct feeling that the Human race is being led along by a lot of strange 'powerful' people who blind themselves to the masses who are trying to live a decent life on this planet.The Ibuku satellite results seem to prove the Big lie in all this but I've heard nothing on any Media to point this out!Why is this?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Clearly, all the pollutants we through on the lands, rivers, and seas cannot have any effect of any kind in anything at all. And don't get me started about all the forests that are destroyed every year! And the combination of the two, together with the CO2 and other gases and toxins that are thrown up in the air every day? Bah. No effect whatsoever. We're fine doing as we do.

    Who cares about all those nerds who have spent years and years researching many small details? I drive my car to the shopping mall every day, and I see that in summer it's warm, and in winter it's cold. So I know what I'm talking about!

    ReplyDelete





All serious comments published after moderation.
Comments should be polite, and respect all views.
No bad language. Spam never makes it!