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.


Climate Science Corrupted

After reading Donna Laframboise's The Delinquent Teenager (See HERE) an exposure of the irretrievably compromised Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), This Climate Sceptic (TCS) was drawn back to some of the earlier writings of John McLean and, particularly to the SPPI report, Climate Science Corrupted from November 2009.

John writes of the history of the formation of the IPCC:
The other key factor for the IPCC was the adoption of the UNEP's methods of coercing governments and the general public. Those methods included (a) the use of the environmentalists' catch-all the "precautionary principle", (b) a penchant for creating models based on partially complete scientific understanding and then citing the output of those models as evidence, (c) the politicisation of science through the implied claim that consensus determines scientific truth, (d) the use of strong personalities and people of influence, and (e) the manipulation of the media and public opinion. Directly and indirectly these methods greatly influenced political parties whether they held government or not.
John writes that "It is long overdue that the IPCC was called for what it is - a political body driven not by the evidence that it pretends exists but by the beliefs and philosophies of the UNEP , the IPCC's sponsor,  and by the initial holders of the key IPCC positions.