The BEST of advice: Don't live in the PAST

The Sydney Morning Herald has an article today ( reprinted from the New York Times):(LINK)
Cartoons by Josh

How I saw past the hot air on climate (LINK)

Richard Muller writes of his Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature
Study (BEST):
 Three years ago, I identified problems in previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very existence of global warming.   
Our results show that the average temperature of the Earth's land has risen by about 1.5 degrees Celsius over the past 250 years, including an increase of five-sixths of one degree over the past 50 years. Moreover, it appears likely that essentially all of this rise is from humans' emission of greenhouse gases.

The trouble is in his first three words ~ Three years ago - Richard is living in the past. Even in the past, co-author of his paper,  Judith  Curry, an American climatologist and chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, accused him "of  trying to mislead the public by hiding the fact that BEST’s research shows global warming has stopped."(LINK)
However, a new pre-print paper has changed all that (LINK)
 Roger Pielke Snr writes: (LINK)
This paper is a game changer, in my view, with respect to the use of the land surface temperature anomalies as part of the diagnosis of global warming.
In direct contradiction to Richard Muller’s BEST study,  the new Watts et al 2012 paper has very effectively shown that a substantive warm bias exists even in the mean temperature trends.  This type of bias certainly exists throughout the Global Historical Climate Network, as well as what Anthony has documented for the US Historical Climate Reference Network.
Roger adds:
(Muller's) latest BEST claims are, in my view, an embarrassment. 
Let's not forget that, although his paper has been floating around in the scientific arena,
Muller's study has not yet been published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, but he says he plans to do so at some point. 

Jo Nova writes (of the Watts paper): (LINK)

Assuming that no major problems are found, the pieces of the jigsaw fit and pass the common sense test. Yes, hot air rises off concrete.
  1. There goes half the warming trend. The most accurate thermometers in the right places are not recording high trends. High estimates come from combining good records with poor ones then adjusting that up.
  2. They show Mueller and BEST’s latest exaggerated claims of 1.5C are meaningless.
  3. They show that only class 1 and 2 stations (which are placed well, not next to concrete, car-parks, or air-conditioners) give reliable data and the warming trend from these stations is much lower than the warming trend from Class 3, 4 or 5 stations. It’s what we always knew — thermometers near artificial heat sources are measuring artificial warming, but it’s not the global kind.
  4. Mueller, BEST, GISS, Hadley and all the others should have removed the data from poor stations entirely. No amount of statistical chicanery can correct the artificial warming effect no matter how you adjust, blend, or homogenize the data.
  5. Worse, the adjusted data shows an even warmer trend than the warmest and worst stations. That casts a very dark shadow indeed. How honest or impartial are the scientists who adjust data from stations with thermometers near air-conditioners and create more warming? Bad stations have been adjusted up, instead of down, and then the good stations were adjusted up to match the now-really-awful-bad ones. The stench of failure and a lack of dedication to the truth in on show…
You don’t need a PhD to know that thermometers placed in car parks are not measuring global warming.


  1. Jo Nova points out that the SMH article about Muller has now mysteriously disappeared.


Post a Comment

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